mmmmmmi 


■,!.'vl,'';i'iV';';'; ';''';■ ■ '■,'■';' ' i > ■ , - ' ' ■ '' .,•'.,' ' ,', ,.;'; 


"'-' TW ' 

Q 


f "^^^" 


.0 

.G7C77 


1 








1^ 



^o.^^ 

''%. 

^ 




'■-.--■-■••/"\ 









"o. 




^oV' 










^<^- 










a? %<v 









0^ "^<^ *«;o' .^^ 













^^0^ 




G^ ^ ♦^^^7^• A 



N 



ANGLOPHOBIA 



ANGLOPHOBIA 

AN ANALYSIS OF ANTI-BRITISH 
PREJUDICE IN THE UNITED STATES 



BY 

J. G. COOK 




Sor>TON 

The Four Seas Company 

1919 



Copyright, ipip, by 
The Four Seas Company 



The Four 'Seas Press 
Boston., Mass., U. S. A. 

(g)Ci.A5 2 9 451 

JUL 31 \m 



PREFACE 



The contents of this volume are the substance, 
and in some degree the arrangement of pieces, 
pubUshed originally in a county newspaper. The 
very flattering comments of personal friends who 
read them — some no doubt uttered to soothe my 
vanity — as well as the love and affection that I 
bear to this the mental child of my old age whose 
feeble life I desire to preserve, have combined to 
induce me to revise them, eliminate, add to, 
polish and collect them into this form. These 
considerations, with some, may not be a satisfac- 
tory answer to the question, "why this waste of 
time, labor and printer's paper — the last thing at 
this time regarded as a big item in the high cost 
of living — adding one more volume to the im- 
measurable mass of unsaleable books now piled 
up in the warehouses, shelves and cellars of pub- 
lishing houses awaiting a conflagration and insur- 
ance adjuster?" To these imaginary Missour- 
ians who insist on being shown, I will explain 
that the only available statistics on the subject 
that I have been able to gather prove that ninety- 
nine and one half per cent of all the subscribers 



6 Preface 

and borrowers of that newspaper, never read a 
word of any of those papers ; but after glancing 
at the repulsive looking title — "Anglophobia" — 
would pass it up, thinking it was a discourse on 
some disreputable and unpalatable patent medi- 
cine, or something concerning mad dogs. Some 
of these people deserve another chance to add to 
their knowledge, hence this book. 

I have not a solitary doubt that this book will 
be a complete failure, financially, instructively or 
in the capacity to survive one edition ; but I trust 
my readers will not indulge in too much tearful 
sympathy for me on that account, for the num- 
ber and character of the failures in my life has 
rendered me somewhat callous to the pain and 
mortification that once accompanied them. It 
may be instructive to my friends and gratifying 
to enemies to mention a few of them : 

Among the earliest failures of my life was 
when at the age of 17 years, in the year 1862, I 
attempted with others to thrash "Uncle Sam," 
an effort that was not in the main a success, "but 
quite to the contrary," as was remarked by a 
passenger on a ship to a lady, when she asked 
him if he had breakfasted. 

The civil and criminal dockets of the courts in 
this and adjoining counties for the past forty- 



Preface 7 

three years will disclose many failures to win 
verdicts that I knew my clients were entitled to. 
At first such adverse verdicts would distress and 
disappoint me more than they would my clients, 
even when the death penalty was included; but 
later in life I could listen to an adverse verdict 
with perfect immobility of countenance and with- 
out a quiver of an eye-lash, at the same time 
secretly blaspheming the jury and its verdict in 
a manner that was perfectly withering and un- 
christianlike. 

It was in the year 1878 that I undertook the 
spiritual instruction in a Sunday school of eight 
or nine boys, aged from 10 to 14 years ; my suc- 
cess in that undertaking was not good; in fact, 
not to put too fine a point on it, it was a dismal 
failure. My attention was painfully called to the 
fact of such a failure by being called upon some 
years later to assist in extricating one of those 
boys from a mine down in Mexico, whither he 
had been sent by the constituted authorities of 
that most unhappy country for helping to rob a 
train. A vivacious young lady suggested, when 
I told of that experience in her hearing, that I 
had exhibited my usual prescience by giving such 
instruction to those boys as would afterwards en- 
able me to make a fee out of them; which re- 



8 Preface 

mark implied that I had given those youngsters 
practical instructions in regard to train robbing 
and how to commit other felonies. 

While it is a fact that I was perfectly innocent 
of any such purpose, forethought or instruction, 
the circumstances tended to justify her remark 
to that degree that I was wholly unprepared to 
make any answer to her accusation, and it was 
more than a week before I was able to formulate 
a suitable rejoinder to her repartee. 

A spark of satisfaction will remain to me re- 
gardless of the fate of this little book, and that is, 
that although it occupies but an infinitesimal 
space in the literary world it will be first to oc- 
cupy this particular field of literary exploitation. 
For more than sixty years I have been an omni- 
verous and reasonably intelligent reader, and 
with average memory, and I do not now recall 
any writer who has attempted to combat the pre- 
judices that some Americans have against the 
English government and people, and show the 
groundlessness of such dislike. An Englishman 
is, and ought to be too proud and independent to 
combat a prejudice that he knows to be ground- 
less — American writers seem to have regarded 
the subject as unimportant and not worth their 
serious thought. 



Preface 9 

It has been asserted by quite a number of peo- 
ple that the whole theme of "Anglophobia" is 
merely a fad or hobby of my own, and that there 
is not in the United States such widespread anti- 
English or pro-German sentiment as I assume in 
this book ; and my experience and opportunity for 
observation are too limited as to number of per- 
sons talked to, and area of country investigated, 
to furnish a basis for such generalization. It is 
my belief, however, formed from an observation 
of more than fifty years, that there exists in the 
minds of a vast number of Americans of Anglo- 
Saxon descent, a deep seated hatred for Great 
Britain, the reason for which they are not able 
to state clearly. The contention however is not 
susceptible of proof one way or the other and so 
it is left for the individual reader to sound, or to 
listen to, the sentiment of the people in his own 
locality or elsewhere, and formulate his own 
opinion as to whether this essay is entirely use- 
less or is calculated to serve a laudable purpose. 

With an earnest and patriotic aim to serve 
such a purpose, I now launch this frail bark upon 
the uncertain sea of public opinion, with all its 
imperfections on its head, where lurking sub- 
marine critics are submerged, ready to discharge 



lo Preface 

a satirical torpedo at its feeble and frightened 
body, if found to be worth the ammunition. 

And now, O most respected and honored 
reader, to conciliate you and win your good will 
and forgiveness, I will tell you truthfully that 
this is my first, last and' only venture; and like 
Cid Hamet Benengeli when he completed his his- 
tory of the life and adventures of the redoubt- 
able Don Quixote, I will now give my pen an un- 
broken eternal rest : 

"Condemned at length to be forgotten quite 
With all the pages which 'twas thine to write." 

J. G. COOK 

Burnet, Texas. 



CONTENTS 

Chapter Page 

Introduction 15 

The American's First Impressions . . 22 

Choosing an Enemy 32 

Blood's Thicker Than Water ... 50 
Un preparedness vs. Readiness ... 59 

It Might Have Been 69 

Some Law-makers and Some Lawyers 

Affected 80 

American Military Caste — Contraband 

— Embargo 90 

Embargo, Propagandists, and American 

ESAUS lOI 

Civilization, and Plans of Paul Kruger 108 
Original "Scrap of Paper" Treaty — 

Dogs of War Let Loose .... 116 
Comparative Manhood — Kruger and a 

Mier Prisoner 124 

Parallel Between the United States 
AND Great Britain in the Treat- 
ment of Mormons, Filipinos, and 
Boers 131 



ANGLOPHOBIA 



CHAPTER I 
Introduction 

The foregoing caption is not intended as a conun- 
drumi; it is merely a question to be answered — 
unsatisfactorily it may be — in this and succeed- 
ing chapters. The word "Anglophobia" is de- 
fined by Webster to be "Dislike of England," and 
the term will be hereinafter applied to Americans 
of Anglo-Saxon blood who are affected in this 
way. It can be readily understood why many 
Irish-Americans and German-Americans dislike 
Great Britain, but it requires some thought and 
historic investigation to understand why Anglo- 
Saxon Americans should entertain hatred and 
vindictive dislike towards people of their own 
blood, traditions, and history. The only harm 
resulting heretofore from this feeling was to 
cause the two nationalities, who are essentially 
the same in all of those characteristics that make 
for the highest order of modern civilization, to 

15 



i6 Anglophobia 

become to a certain degree estranged; and to 
cause Americans to view the British Govern- 
ment with distrust and suspicion. The existence 
and extent of this feehng of Americans against 
them has caused many Enghshmen, who might 
have immigrated to the United States and be- 
come citizens and mingled with our people and 
have reinforced the ever decreasing proportion 
of Anglo-Saxon blood in our nation, to migrate 
to Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South 
Africa, East India, and to other English-speaking 
colonies and dependencies of Great Britain; 
where they were welcomed and where they would 
not be wounded by expressions of dislike for 
their mother country. It is not easy to estimate 
the effect upon our country of losing that rein- 
forcement of Anglo-Saxon blood, and so increase 
the proportion of blood of the strange untempered 
people from Eastern Europe and Western Asia 
that have swarmed to our shores, and become 
citizens of our country. 

There can be no more auspicious or appropriate 
time to combat this prejudice against the English 
government than the present, and if possible to 
remove it by exhibiting its groundlessness. Few 
Anglophobists in America are able off hand 
to state the reason for their dislike, which proves 



Introduction 17 

that the feeling is founded on prejudice created 
from misinformation or hearsay. 

The two nations are now for the first time in 
history acting together, waging a terrific war 
against a common enemy, defending and uphold- 
ing the principles of liberty and democracy which 
are the common heritage of both; through the 
wisest counsellors of both countries they are to- 
day (April 30, 191 7) consulting in regard to the 
best method of conducting the war and other 
matters vital to the success of their armies. 
Within a few short months American boys may 
be standing in the same line of battle with young 
Englishmen and charging, falling, and dying for 
the same great cause of human liberty and 
democracy; an Englishman may perhaps render 
first aid to an American, or a wounded British 
soldier may be carried from the battlefield by an 
American. There are innumerable kindnesses 
and help that can be rendered for each other by 
Isoldiers fighting for the same cause, and the ut- 
most good will, respect and confidence should ex- 
ist between soldiers of different nationalities who 
have to rely upon the courage and fidelity of each 
other in their deadly conflicts with the enemy. 

The world is now entering upon an era where- 
in the English-speaking nations of the Anglo- 



i8 - Anglophobia 

Saxon race, like the tribe of Issachar, will bend 
their backs to the white man's burdens, upholding 
the weak, taming the savage, restraining the 
tyrant, enforcing peace, justice and mercy 
among the nations of the earth, setting examples 
that will guide mankind to right and happiness. 
They must act together and in harmony to ac- 
complish the great work for the human family 
that lies out before them. There can exist to- 
day in the heart of a patriotic American no great- 
er or no more exalted desire than to see perfect 
harmony between the great nations that will soon 
be called upon to perform that labor of love for 
humanity. It is these and like considerations 
that have urged the author to undertake a task 
that seems to have been ignored by the persons 
most vitally interested, and that is, the effort to 
combat those prejudices by showing their ground- 
lessness. The personal and national pride of the 
English would prevent their condescending to 
combat prejudices that they regard as unjust 
and without cause. But the American peo- 
ple are vitally interested in forming and main- 
taining a fair and unprejudiced judgment of all 
the nations of the earth with whom they are at 
peace; more especially the nation with whom 
the American people are closely allied by blood. 



Introduction 19 

language, laws and traditions, as they are with 
the English. It might have been reasonably ex- 
pected that among the many hundreds of gifted 
American writers who have flourished during the 
past one hundred or more years, some one of 
them in the interest of right and justice, and 
without compromising his love for and loyalty to 
his own country, would have undertaken to re- 
move or palliate such prejudices, as far as the 
facts of history would "permit. But no such 
writer has ever attempted to separate the Anglo- 
phobists into the different classes or groups as 
they exist, analyze and trace to their origin the 
prejudices they entertain. 

With no experience as an essayist or writer 
of books, it is with many doubts and misgivings 
that the author attempts the exploration of this 
new field of literary venture; but he is sustained 
with the hope that should this effort fail to ac- 
complish the purposes designed, it may at least 
direct public attention to the necessity or exped- 
iency of an effort to break down those prejudices 
and may induce some abler writer to make the 
effort. 

To forestall any impression that the author is 
biased in favor of English people or is prompted 
by a feeling of national loyalty to their govern- 



20 Anglophobia 

ment, or that this is not a perfectly impartial dis- 
cussion of the subject in hand, it is nothing but 
right and proper to set down that while he is not 
an Anglophobist neither is he an "Anglo- 
maniac," defined by Webster to be one "who has 
a mania for what is English"; the symptoms of 
the mania being discernable by one affecting the 
broad "a," the use of the monocle, and a waste- 
ful and perfectly meaningless use of the word 
"What" at the end of a sentence, and who is most 
exquisitely portrayed by Leon Wilson in his 
"Ruggles of Red Gap." The ancestral head of 
his family in America emigrated to this country 
many decades before the Revolutionary war, 
whose descendants fought the British in that war 
and in the year 1812, and he is therefore quali- 
fied to discuss the subject from an impartial view 
point. 

The author has found difficulty in maintaining 
that impersonal attitude that is achieved by the 
practised and gifted writer, and in effacing him- 
self — keeping the ego in the background. 
Ordinarily the liberal space allowed to the Pre- 
face and Introduction ought to afford room 
enough to contain all the personal pronouns of the 
first person singular that are required to elucidate 
his subject. It is not any want of modesty in 



Introduction 21 

the author that causes them to bob up fre- 
quently in other places in this book, but rather 
because of a want of adeptness in arranging the 
subject matter of his theme, so as to exclude the 
ego, and keep it penned up in its proper place. 
The kindly reader is therefore requested to ig- 
nore the presence of the personal pronoun where 
it obtrudes itself, out of its place, the same as you 
would a pert child attempting to lead in the con- 
versation of grown peoples. 

The genus Anglophobist is susceptible of be- 
ing divided into four separate and distinct species 
or classes, each having distinct cause for their 
antipathy, and traceable to want of information, 
misinformation, conditions no longer existing or 
misunderstood. The most numerous and most 
respectable of those having the most reasonable 
cause for their dislike will be the first in the order 
of discussion. 



CHAPTER II 

The American's First Impressions 

Commencing about the year 1790 and continu- 
ing to the year i860 — a period of seventy years — 
the young Americans in nearly every community 
in the United States, on the 4th day of each July, 
listened to the reading of the Declaration of In- 
dependence, wherein the wrongs and injuries 
done to this country by the British Government 
were set forth in clear and incisive language 
that every one could understand. On these oc- 
casions, generally at Fourth of July barbecues, 
the orator of the day, a member of Congress or 
some other influential and prominent citizen of 
the community, in eloquent and forcible language 
recited all the acts of oppression of the British 
Government towards the colonies that led up to 
the Revolutionary war ; and would dwell at length 
upon the right of the Colonists as English sub- 
jects to resist all forms of taxation imposed upon 
them without their consent and without repre- 
sentation in the legislative body levying the tax. 
These speakers would dwell upon the privation 
22 



The American's First Impressions 23 

and suffering of the American soldiers ; the glo- 
rious victories of American arms by land and sea, 
etc. At no time during these long series of years 
at such 4th of July occasions, or elsewhere, did 
any person speak in behalf of England or offer 
any excuse or fact in mitigation of the alleged 
wrongs. Naturally the result of such patriotic 
appeals and arraignment of England from year to 
year through more than two generations of citi- 
zens was to implant in the minds of Americans a 
deep antipathy for the English people, without 
discrimination ; a feeling which was handed down 
from father to son and aggravated and intensified 
as these charges were made from year to year, 
especially during and after the war of 181 2. The 
acts of England which brought about this war 
were also included in the 4th of July orations; 
and people were told of Americans being forcibly 
taken from American ships by the commanders 
of English men-of-war and compelled to serve in 
the English navy. 

Another cause of the anti-English feeling, dur- 
ing the period mentioned, is the fact that previous 
to our Civil War England was the only great 
nation with which America had ever been at war, 
and the loss, suffering and privation to America 
of the two English wars stood alone without off- 



^4 Anglophobia 

set or comparison with any other war. It is true 
that a naval war between France and the United 
States lasted from the beginning of 1799 to the 
close of 1800, but that war being altogether a 
naval warfare, did not seem to make much im- 
pression on the minds of Americans, or embitter 
them against the French nation; but it is true 
nevertheless that the conduct of France toward 
Americans and American sailors and shipping 
was far more severe and aggravating than the 
conduct of England that brought on the war of 
18 1 2. These wars with France and Great Brit- 
ain will be discussed more at length further on. 

In respect to the Revolutionary War, Ameri- 
cans during all the period referred to seem not 
to have considered or known that a great ma- 
jority of the English people were bitterly opposed 
to the coercive measures of the government of 
Great Britain towards the colonies; that the 
finest intellects, the greatest and most eloquent 
statesmen that the English nation has ever pro- 
duced, put forth their mightiest efforts against 
the commencement and prosecution of the war; 
such men for instance as Burke, Charles James 
Fox, Dempster, Wilkes and others in the House 
of Commons; and in the House of Lords, Lord 
Camden, Marquis of Rockingham, and Earl of 



The American's First Impressions 25 

Chatham and many other noblemen of transcen- 
dent genius. Lord Chatham was the elder Pitt, 
and many years Prime Minister under George the 
Second and one of the greatest statesmen that 
the world has ever produced. The English peo- 
ple of that day were situated like the great mass 
of the German people of today, that is, deceived 
by the government, exploited into the war by an 
autocratic tyrant aided by a class of men who 
believed in autocratic government. George III 
was a pure-blooded German, believed in auto- 
cracy and the divine right of kings, and during 
the period of his sanity endeavored to reestablish 
those ancient prerogatives of the crown, the at- 
tempted exercise of which caused Charles I to 
lose his head. Why should the acts and the mis- 
conduct of an obstinate German autocrat, together 
with a subservient majority in Parliament and 
vacillating Prime Minister (Lord North) be at- 
tributed to the great majority of just, merciful, 
democratic Englishmen as their unpardonable sin? 
To bring the answer of that question nearer home, 
why should the entire present citizenship of the 
state of Texas be condemned for the rapacity, 
dishonesty and oppressive acts of the Carpet Bag 
Government, forced on the people after the close 
of the Civil War? History affords numerous 



26 Anglophobia 

instances of governments and rulers acting con- 
trary to the wishes and interests of the majority 
of the people they govern ; but instances are rare 
where a large and intelligent class of people for 
a period of more than one hundred and forty 
years persistently condemns and denounces a 
whole nation of people, because of the action of 
a minority government of that nation many years 
ago against the wishes of the majority. 

The misinformation or lack of information ex- 
isting in the minds of many Americans in regard 
to the facts and conditions in England preceding 
and culminating in the Revolutionary War, exists 
also in respect to many things having a bearing 
upon, and resulting in the war of 1812. 

From 1793 to 1807 Great Britain had been — 
with an interval of one or two years of feverish 
peace — continuously at war with France; at first 
with the French Republic, and later with Em- 
peror Napoleon ; in the latter year Napoleon was 
supreme in continental Europe, all resistance to 
his autocratic power had ceased, England alone 
was fighting him single-handed with all of Europe 
at his back. Twice during the period mentioned 
there had been combinations of the fleets of three 
or four of the European powers under the leader- 
ship of France for the purpose of invading Eng- 



The American's First Impressions 27 

land; on each occa'Sion the fleets were scattered 
by storms, whereby England was saved from in- 
vasion and subjugation. Danger to England 
from the combined powers of Europe was still 
eminent in 1807, her principal defense was her 
navy, thousands of her marines were deserting 
from the navy and obtaining employment as 
sailors on American merchant vessels. The laws 
of Great Britain prohibited a British subject from 
renouncing his allegiance to that government and 
becoming a citizen of another country, and she 
proceeded to impress or capture those runaway 
Englishmen wherever found on American vessels. 
The United States, long a part of Great Britain, 
recognized the existence of the law against ex- 
patriation, having but a short time before lived 
under that law, made no special objections to the 
reclaiming of deserters from the English navy, 
but objected to the insult to the flag in holding 
up and searching American ships; still she had 
no provisions for the return of those deserters in 
any other way. 

Great Britain contended that she was fighting 
alone for the freedom, liberty and democracy of 
the world, that her subjugation would be soon fol- 
lowed by the conquest of America ; Louisana Ter- 
ritory and Canada would be retaken by Napoleon, 



28 Anglophobia 

whose autocratic power would be finally estab- 
lished upon the ruins of free government; that 
if the United States did not choose to aid Great 
Britain in her struggle for the liberty of human- 
ity from the oppression of a tyrant, she should 
at least cease to be a refuge and asylum for the 
deserters from the British navy, thereby aiding 
the enemy of democracy to deplete and weaken 
her marine forces ; that if such drain on the Eng- 
lish marine continued her warships would even- 
tually be tied to the docks, her means of self-de- 
fense gone, leaving her helpless at the feet of 
Napoleon Bonaparte, whose all absorbing pas- 
sions were lust for power and frenzied hate for 
England. 

It is now, has always been, and will always be, 
an open question as to how far the United States 
was to blame for the depredations on her com- 
merce and insult to her flag ; and whether she did 
not in a great measure, by her pacific policy, en- 
courage such acts, and contribute to the wrongs 
and injuries committed upon her, often given as 
a reason for her hatred for the English; and 
while such depredations were unjustifiable except 
for the very doubtful excuse furnished by ex- 
igencies of the British government, growing out 
of her wars with Napoleon, still as the same kind 



The American's First Impressions 29 

of depredations were committed upon American 
commerce by France and for a longer period of 
time, there can be no reason for exonerating the 
French and condemning the EngUsh for the same 
character of conduct. 

In rehearsing those depredations of the French 
— one series of which culminated in the war of 
1 799- 1800 — it is not intended to revive or excite 
ill-will or prejudice against that brave, patriotic, 
high-minded and self-sacrificing nation, for 
whom, in her tragic struggle for existence, the 
great heart of the American people now reaches 
out in sympathy, in admiration and affection ; but 
such references are made merely for the purpose 
of exhibiting to the Anglophobist the inconsist- 
ency of condemning the act of a man or nation 
whom he dislikes, while approving or passing 
over the same thing done by another. 

In the summer of 1794 a treaty was concluded 
between Great Britain and America tending 
powerfully to promote the political amity and 
commercial benefits of both countries. This gave 
great offense to France which in 1795 came un- 
der the government or misgovernment of the 
"Directory," one of the governing boards or bu- 
reaus that ruled France during the progress of 
her revolution. The treaty did not in any man- 



30 Anglophobia 

ner discriminate against France or her commerce, 
but being at that time at war with Great Britain, 
she resented any comity or friendship between 
the United States and Great Britain. France 
seems to have felt that the aid which she had 
given to America during the Revolutionary war 
should be repaid by perpetual fealty to her ; that 
America should not have friendly relations with 
any power that was at enmity with France. Even 
before the treaty in 1793, French privateers had 
commenced war on American commerce by seiz- 
ing ships and cargoes on the high seas, assuming 
that the sense of obligation and gratitude for as- 
sistance in her struggle for independence would 
keep America from resenting such depredations. 
In the presidential contest in 1796, the French 
minister took a very active part to defeat 
Adams, the Federalist candidate — the political 
party responsible for the treaty with Great Brit- 
ain. Failing to accomplish his defeat, France 
quickened her aggressive warfare on American 
commerce, seizing, searching, and confiscating 
ships, even in American waters. In retaliation, 
the United States at the beginning of 1799 issued 
letters of marque and reprisal to American pri- 
vateers. After about two years of raiding on 



The American's First Impressions 31 

French shipping, during which time about ninety 
ships were captured or destroyed by the United 
States cruisers and privateers, in 1800 the Direc- 
tory was abolished. Napoleon became first 
consul, and for a time there was peace. 



CHAPTER III. 

Choosing an Enemy 

When Thomas Jefferson was elected President 
in 1800, he brought into power a party bent on 
reversing all of the policies of the Federalists — 
the party that had been in power since the gov- 
ernment was inaugurated under the constitution 
— especially those that had tended to centralize 
power in the general government. The new party 
regarded a strong navy and standing army of any 
size as affording the Federal government a too ef- 
fectual means of acquiring and holding supreme 
power. 

In pursuance of this policy, President Jeffer- 
son and his party caused work to be suspend- 
ed on the new warships that had been provided 
for under the previous administration ; those that 
remained were dismantled, docked, left out of re- 
pair, with neither equipment of guns, ammunition 
or men. By the government's policy it invited 
every fourth rate power in the world to impose 
on its citizens and prey on its commerce on the 
high seas with impunity. It may well be doubted 
32 



Choosing an Enemy 33 

that the British commanders would have gone to 
the extent of boarding American ships and arrest- 
ing deserters if the United States had been pro- 
vided with a fair-sized navy. The government 
by its poUcy said to American seamen: "Stay in 
port, don't venture beyond the three-mile limit at 
sea ; if you do, it will be at your own peril. Your 
welfare does not justify the risk of increasing 
Federal power, by building and equipping war- 
ships, and maintaining crews and marines to man 
them." What kind of treatment could the Unit- 
ed States expect that her citizens would receive 
from the other nations, when she exhibited such 
small concern for their welfare? Though such 
indifference to their protection did not justify 
Great Britain in her encroachments, still, when 
this and all other circumstances are weighed, such 
as the national peril to Great Britain made emin- 
ent by the attitude of nearly all European na- 
tions, the natural instinct of self-defense and self- 
preservation which no man-made law can restrict 
or circumscribe, many grounds can be found that 
will in some degree mitigate her offense. In 
view of international law as recognized in the 
year 1807, these acts of Great Britain in reclaim- 
ing the deserters from her navy, should not be 
regarded as justifying the hatred for the English 



34 Anglophobia 

to continue for more than one hundred years. 
After all, they were not more offensive than the 
conduct of Captain Wilkes, commander of an 
American man-of-war, in over-hauling the Eng- 
lish steamer Trent and forcibly taking and re- 
moving Slidell and Mason, Confederate commis- 
sioners on their way to Europe as passengers on 
the Trent. 

It is one of the unaccountable and anomalous 
phases of human nature that so many Southern 
people — ex-confederate soldiers and their des- 
cendants — should entertain illwill and dislike for 
England, in the face of undisputed history that 
the most influential classes in England were 
known to sympathize with the South during the 
Civil War ; and that she came near going to war 
with the United States on account of the Slidell 
and Mason incident. Yet among the bitterest 
English haters today many are to be found in the 
Southern states. 

The depredation on American commerce by 
Great Britain was one of the proximate causes 
of the war in 1812. In 1803 war again broke 
out between France and England and it was not 
long before each nation, England by her orders 
in council, and Napoleon by his decrees, estab- 
lished paper blockades of all the ports of each 



Choosing an Enemy 35 

other, which included every port on the Mediter- 
ranean Sea, European ports on the Atlantic 
Ocean and Baltic Sea, and sea-ports of Great 
Britain. Napoleon by his decrees ordered his 
cruisers and privateers to capture and confiscate 
the ships of any neutral nation that had stopped 
at an English port, or had goods of English 
manufacture in their cargoes. England by her 
orders in council made practically the same res- 
trictions with reference to neutral trade with 
France and her allies. The United States being 
the only neutral nation having any commerce 
v/hatever was thus caught between the upper and 
nether millstones. Those orders and decrees 
were not directed specially against the United 
States, but tlie practical effect amounted to a de- 
claration of war by both nations against Ameri a. 
From the year 1806, when these orders and de- 
crees v/ere first made, to the fall of Napoleon in 
1814, which also included the full period of the 
war in 181 2, marked the weakest, most humiliat- 
ing, and m.ost disgraceful period of American 
histor)^ Having done everything possible to 
weaken the hands of the general government, hav- 
ing dismantled the navy, reduced the regular 
army to a force of 6,000 men, having cut down 
the annual revenue to barely sufficient to support 



36 Anglophobia 

the government on a peace basis, the government 
was suddently confronted with the dire necessity 
of having, and exercising for the defense of the 
country, the very powers of the Federal govern- 
ment that had been destroyed by the Jefferson ad- 
ministration. The only measure of redress or 
reprisal left to the United States, and for the pro- 
tection of her shipping, was to place an embargo 
on the shipment of any kind of freight whatever 
from the United States to any country in the 
world, and prohibit the exit of any American 
owned ships. This embargo produced such a 
storm of protest from the people as not only to 
demoralize the government but seriously threaten 
the Union itself. New England objected be- 
cause it ruined her commerce and left her ships 
to decay at the docks, her maritime population 
without employment. The Middle and Southern 
states complained because they were deprived by 
the embargo of a foreign market for their agri- 
cultural products. 

Discontent and dissatisfaction and resentment 
towards the government increased; a plan was 
formed in New England, at the instigation of the 
Federalists, to nullify the embargo and resist the 
enforcement of the law, which would necessarily 
cause secession and result in a union or com- 



Choosing an Enemy 37 

mercial alliance with England. John Quincy 
Adams, Senator from Massachusetts, who had 
left the Federalist party, came to Washington to 
counsel the President and warn him of the temper 
and trend of affairs in New England. 

At the beginning of 1809, Congress substituted 
for the embargo the Non-Intercourse Act which 
permitted commerce with all nations except 
France and England and their allies, and as there 
was little or no commerce between the United 
States and the other neutral nations the Act 
served no purpose, except by lifting the embargo 
to turn loose American ships to engage in the old 
and respectable crime of smuggling. Finding 
that the smuggling, which took the place of open 
trade with France and England, cut off the 
revenue derived by the government from the tar- 
iff. Congress after eighteen months' trial repealed 
the Non-Intercourse act, and the United States 
fell back once more upon negotiations with the 
two countries to repeal their several orders and 
decrees. England refused to revoke her orders 
prohibiting neutrals from trading with France; 
Napoleon agreed to revoke his decrees prohibit- 
ing neutral trading with England and notified 
President Jefferson that he had in fact done so. 
This influenced many hundreds of ships with 



38 Anglophobia 

valuable cargoes consisting principally of goods 
of English manufacture to be sent to France and 
to the ports of her allies. As soon, however, as 
they entered those ports they were seized and 
confiscated with their cargoes, the wily Em- 
peror claiming that his decrees were still in force. 
The loss to the American owners from such de- 
ceitful artifices amounted to quite ten million dol- 
lars in one season. For more than two years 
longer matters continued to grow worse, with a 
growing certainty that war was inevitable either 
with England or France. The United States was 
too weak to fight both, or either one of them 
singly, for that matter. She was ih the attitude 
of a trembling scared boy placed by his compan- 
ions in a ring with two husky bullies, his retreat 
cut off, and compelled to fight one of the bullies, 
with an absolute certainty of getting a licking 
whichever one he picked on. The author is re- 
counting a sad and actual experience of his boy- 
hood days, which enables him to describe accu- 
rately the sensations and travails of soul of Presi- 
dent Madison and Congress for the next two 
years or more. Without a navy, without an 
army, without armament, munitions, money, 
revenue or credit, the United States strove man- 
fully to keep out of war. She tried the Non-In- 



Choosing an Enemy 39 

tercourse act again on both nations, but it would 
not work. Meantime she was trying in all good 
faith and sincerity to decide which one of the two 
nations was the safest for her to fight. Hered- 
itary dislike for England and love for France 
finally decided the question, and while it was ad- 
mitted that Napoleon had done far more to in- 
jure America than England had, on June i8, 
1812, war was declared against Great Britain. 
True to the bad luck that seemed to have dogged 
the administrations of Jefferson and Madison in 
their foreign relations, the President soon learned 
that on the day before Congress declared war, 
England had revoked her orders in Council which 
had given such offense to the United States; 
and about the same time it was learned that a 
few weeks previously a French fleet had been 
sent to sea for the purpose of capturing or des- 
troying all American ships and sweeping her com- 
merce from the high seas. But it was too late 
to recall the declaration of war; America had 
turned loose her little navy of seven frigates and 
a few small brigs on British commerce and on her 
innumerable men-of-war. Congress had author- 
ized the President to increase the army from six 
to twenty-five thousand men, and to call for fifty 
thousand volunteers, but it absolutely refused to 



40 Anglophobia 

levy any taxes or otherwise provide means to 
carry on the war. 

The financial centers of the country were the 
commercial cities on the Atlantic coasts, but the 
government adopted the fatuous policy of put- 
ting another embargo on all the shipping in all 
of those cities; this produced a perfect furore 
among the moneyed men of the nation, and when 
the government endeavored to float a loan with 
these financiers to raise money to prosecute the 
war it was incontinently turned down, its agents 
snubbed with the suggestion that they could not 
aid a government that had a habit of ruining 
their trade by its embargoes. 

Recruiting for the regular army and the volun- 
teer contingent progressed slowly : men could not 
serve without pay and find themselves. With no 
money or credit, war munitions insufficient in 
quantity and quality, with but little field artillery, 
the enemy rapidly assembling on the Canadian 
frontier, sea ports being blockaded by hostile 
squadrons, dissension among the people opposed 
to the war and dissatisfied with the government, 
negotiating with the enemy for the purpose of 
placing themselves once more under British rule, 
surely the outlook for the young nation was bleak 
and disheartening. The progress of events 



Choosing an Enemy 41 

brought no improvement. Some of the New 
England states refused to allow their militia to 
serve beyond the limits of the respective states, 
whereupon it was necessary for the government 
to withdraw the regular troops from the stations 
on the New England coast, thereby exposing the 
whole coast to occupation by the British. 

The battles on land resulted in ignominious de- 
feat of the Americans. Three efforts to invade 
Canada failed and the Americans were driven 
back with heavy losses. General Hull surren- 
dered Detroit with 2,500 Americans to a British 
force numbering about one half of the American 
troops under his command. 

General Ross with four thousand men captured 
the city of Washington, and all the public build- 
ings were burned to the ground. 2,000 Americans 
defending the city, scurried away at the first con- 
tact with the British with a loss of one man killed. 
The fall and abdication of Napoleon on April 4, 
18 14, and his banishment to Elba, released from 
service in Europe the large armies of British 
veterans that had been thoroughly trained and 
seasoned for warfare in the sanguinary wars of 
Napoleon. The naval forces that had been em- 
ployed by Napoleon against England were now 
her allies, and she was therefore able to turn 



42 Anglophobia 

her entire strength, navy and land forces, to the 
war against the United States. Her navy sub- 
divided into squadrons blockaded the main ports 
of America, and began a series of raids and in- 
cursions on coast towns and adjacent country. 
Her land forces were placed along the Canadian 
frontiers in strength sufficient to repel American 
invasions, as well as to raid American territory. 
Her mode of warfare was confined to raids and 
incursions at widely separated and isolated points ; 
keeping the American army scattered and grad- 
ually exhausting its energy, making forced 
marches from point to point to meet and repel 
these numerous incursions, extending for more 
than one thousand miles along the Canadian bor- 
der, and four or five thousand miles of coast line 
extending from Maine to the mouth of the Mis- 
sissippi River, it was impossible for the United 
States to furnish adequate protection to the vast 
extended border and coast line, and the inhabit- 
ants of the harried districts complained bitterly 
at what they regarded as the neglect of their gov- 
ernment to protect them. In parts of New Eng- 
land the feeling assumed a rebellious tone ; seces- 
sion was openly threatened by the Federalists, 
who were strongly pro-British. The Legislature 
of Massachusetts called a convention of New 



Choosing an Enemy 43 

England States and New York, which met in 
secret session and agreed on proceedings looking 
to a union with Great Britain. The island of 
Nantucket declared neutrality and placed itself 
under British protection. 

While the American land forces were victorious 
in several battles along the Canadian border, 
these victories did not counterbalance the losses 
they had suffered from British victories, and 
accomplished nothing except to hearten the 
Americans and restore confidence in their fight- 
ing abilities. The American navy achieved bril- 
liant victories in Lake Erie and Lake Champlain, 
and were generally victorious in the fights be- 
tween a single American ship with a British man- 
of-war, but these victories did nothing towards 
breaking the British blockade or bringing the war 
any nearer to an end. 

The outlook for America in December, 1814, 
was recognized by both nations to be bleak and 
discouraging. No progress to end the war 
would ever be made until the United States 
finally fell to pieces by the sheer dissatisfaction 
of her own people; forming small republics, 
each making its own peace, as New England was 
then about to do. It was at this crisis that the 
Government of Great Britain displayed a mag- 



44 Anglophobia 

nanimity, kindness and consideration towards the 
United States that could not be expected of her 
under all the circumstances or even required by 
the customs and usages of nations at war. The 
declaration of war by the United States on the 
i8th of June, 1812, was without justification. In 
the language of a reliable and distinguished 
American historian, "the cause of the war at the 
very eve of its outbreak had been taken away," 
and again, "The risk of the war was not worse 
than its deep impolicy," and *Tt was a foolhardy 
and reckless risk the Congress was taking" in 
declaring war, and further "The grounds of the 
war were singularly uncertain." Another dis- 
tinguished American historian has written : "The 
declaration of war by America seemed an act of 
sheer madness." 

Instead of waiting for the vanquished nation 
to sue for peace as was the custom, and at a time 
when America was practically helpless and hope- 
less to bring to a successful issue the war that 
she had started. Great Britain held out to her 
enemy the olive branch of peace. The offer was 
promptly and gladly accepted by the United 
States, resulting on December 24, 18 14, in the 
Ghent treaty of peace that has lasted to this day. 

The generosity and broadmindedness of Great 



Choosing an Enemy 45 

Britain were never displayed to a greater degree 
than in waiving all claim for indemnity either in 
money or in territorial concessions. The custom 
and usages of nations has always recognized the 
right of a victorious nation to exact and receive 
such an indemnity from her vanquished enemy, to 
reimburse her for costs, expenses and losses in- 
cident to a war. Even those who are biased in 
favor of America are bound to admit that Great 
Britain was justly and fairly entitled to indemnity 
for losses occasioned by that war. At a time 
when she was straining every nerve, employing 
every resource in her desperate struggle for the 
benefit of mankind against the scourge of Eu- 
rope, single handed and alone, staggering under 
the weight of debts and privations of more than 
twenty years of almost constant warfare, she 
needed and deserved at least the sympathy, if not 
the active aid, of every English-speaking people. 
Instead, our government, by what was claimed 
by the people of New England to be an inexcus- 
able accident prompted by hereditary dislike for 
England, precipitated an unnecessary war and 
added to the burdens and distress of the English 
people, who felt that their nation had been struck 
in the back by those who "were indeed of their 
own tribes and families." At the opening of hos- 



46 Anglophobia 

tilities the United States was the aggressor, her 
navy began the destruction of British ships and 
her land forces invaded Canada before Great 
Britain could prepare to meet her new enemy. 
During the progress of that war hundreds of 
British warships and merchant craft were des- 
troyed, thousands of British seamen and marines 
at sea, and British soldiers on land, lost their 
lives. The war had cost Great Britain millions 
of dollars. 

Never before or since has a conquering nation 
shown to her vanquished enemy such liberality in 
the face of such uncalled for provocations and 
injuries. Even in later periods of the world's 
history indemnities have been exacted against the 
unsuccessful nation, even when no war had ac- 
tually taken place. Germany in recent years an- 
nexed the city and seaport of Kiao Chau in China 
and the inlet of Sausah as a coaling station dur- 
ing the year 1897, as indemnity for the murder 
of two German missionaries ; and from France 
she exacted about one billion dollars besides the 
provinces of Alsace and Lorraine as indemnity 
for losses and outlay resulting from the Franco- 
Prussian war. The United States received from 
Mexico a cession of a vast territory at the close 
of the Mexican war, and while it was ostensibly 



Choosing an Enemy 47 

sold to the United States for twenty-five million 
dollars, the value of the territory was far in ex- 
cess of that sum, which excess constituted a 
princely indemnity. So in the cession of the Phil- 
lipines, Porto Rico, and other islands to the Unit- 
ed States by Spain at the close of the Spanish- 
American war, the actual value of the territory 
ceded was many times more than the twenty mil- 
lions paid to Spain for it, which excess consti- 
tuted a large indemnity. England therefore 
could, in good faith, and in accordance with the 
universal usages of nations, have demanded in- 
demnity from the United States, and could have 
easily enforced it. New England was ready and 
anxious like over-ripe fruit to drop into her hand, 
and the United States was without power to 
coerce her back into the union. The secession of 
New England and her retention by Great Britain 
as indemnity, would in the course of time have 
resulted in the dissolution of the union, or, at 
least, would have arrested national development, 
and delayed, if not prevented, the fulfillment of 
the grand destiny of the American people that is 
now unfolding itself to the enraptured vision of 
the world. 

Uninfluenced by any feeling of malice or re- 
venge growing out of the war. Great Britain re- 



48 Anglophobia 

nounced her right and power to dismember the 
United States by demanding territorial indemnity 
or by affiliating the New England states. 

It is deplorable that the public speakers and 
writers in America, especially writers of our 
school histories and boards that select them, 
should have always regarded it as unpatriotic to 
mention the blunders and mistakes of our ances- 
tors, carefully omitting the mention of any his- 
torical incident, however true, or material that 
would be calculated to moderate our national 
conceit or cause disagreeable emotions in the 
minds of young Americans; they have con- 
sistently refused to suggest in behalf of other 
people that have been at war with us any candid 
and favorable circumstances. The unhappy re- 
sult of this partial and unfair teaching and his- 
tory can never be more aptly exemplified than in 
the United States yielding to the national and 
hereditary dislike emplanted and cultivated in the 
mind of the American people against England 
by American writers and speakers, and declar- 
ing war against her instead of France — a 
war that cost the United States thousands of 
lives and millions of dollars; a war that accom- 
plished nothing except to increase the dislike of 



Choosing an Enemy 49 

the two English-speaking peoples for each other. 
If the war had been declared against France it 
would have been merely a naval warfare, with 
every advantage to the United States, and would 
have ceased upon the fall of Napoleon Bonaparte. 



CHAPTER IV. 

Blood is Thicker Than Water 

Ordinarily a proper and unbiased consideration 
of the facts of history which exhibit the good 
will and kind feeling of the people of England 
for America during the past century should 
overcome the dislike and prejudice in the minds 
of Americans against Great Britain caused by 
the teaching of American orators and historians 
described in the preceding chapters; but with 
many, the first impressions on this subject have 
become unchangeable opinions in hearing the 
same thing repeated so often, and never disputed 
by any one. Many elderly Americans of pure 
English descent can be found who declare their 
dislike for England and admit that they do not 
know the particular reasons for such dislike, ex- 
cept as they have heard in early life the spread- 
eagle speeches of those Fourth of July orators. 
They admit that they have always disliked Eng- 
land; but also declare their respect (and as to 
some individuals their real affection) for the Eng- 
lish people that have settled in America. 
50 



Blood is Thicker Than Water 51 

There is some excuse for and consideration to 
be shown for this class of anti-English Ameri- 
cans; custom and environment over which they 
have no control conspired to embitter them 
against Great Britain. I confess that until I was 
forty-five years old, I had the same intense pre- 
judice against the Old Country. I recall listen- 
ing to one of those spread-eagle orators when I 
was a boy. How he lambasted the English and 
twisted the tail of the English lion, and made 
the American eagle scream! He stamped and 
foamed and roared, turned red in the face and 
shook his fist in the direction he supposed Eng- 
land to be. He personally defied the entire Brit- 
ish empire and dared it individually and collec- 
tively just to put one foot on American soil as 
an invader. The orator was a heavy-set, squatty 
little man, but to boyish admiring eyes he loomed 
up like a giant. The boys who listened to that 
speech were worked up into a perfect frenzy of 
patriotism and hatred for England. For myself, 
I felt that I had been mistreated by Providence 
in not being permitted to be born in time to be a 
Revolutionary soldier, and feared that there 
v/ould not be another war with England in my 
Ufetime. 

These chapters are especially dedicated to this 



52 Anglophobia 

class of English-hating Americans and their des- 
cendants, because I know from my own exper- 
ience how they came to feel that way. 

The other groups of Anglophobists, describe • 
hereafter, are far beyond the reach of argument 
or reason ; they are perfectly incorrigible, and as 
to them this discussion does no good, except to 
counteract the effect of their statements and in- 
fluence. 

We can all remember how the heart of the 
American people warmed towards the English 
when we heard how the British jackies and 
marines on British ships in Hong Kong harbor 
cheered and hurrahed for the Americans as 
Dewey's fleet steamed out for Manila under or- 
ders to "capture the Spanish fleet or destroy it." 
We all regarded the incident as showing how the 
English people would side in the war then start- 
ing, and that it showed that "blood is thicker 
than water." Within one week after war was 
declared against Spain, Great Britain declared 
her neutrality, which was quickly followed by all 
other European powers excepting Germany. 
There is no longer any doubt that at that time 
Germany had already or intended to form an 
alliance with Spain and join the war against the 
United States. This was proven, in a measure, 



Blood is Thicker Than Water 53 

by the conduct of Admiral Deiterich, commanding 
a German fleet at Manila Bay. Immediately af- 
ter the destruction of the Spanish fleet, Com- 
modore Dewey laid siege to the city of Manila. 
On the arrival of the German fleet, after the bat- 
tle. Admiral Deiterich anchored his flagship be- 
tween Dewey's fleet and the City of Manila. The 
rules of naval warfare prohibited neutral ves- 
sels from placing themselves between a belliger- 
ent fleet and a city it was besieging. The Ger- 
man admiral ignored this rule, but was ordered 
by Dewey to remove his vessel. Deiterich leis- 
urely and with apparent reluctance complied 
with the order. The next morning he returned 
to the same place. Dewey again ordered him 
to "get out and stay out," adding that if he 
"wanted to fight he would get it," and began to 
clear for action. The German retired and soon 
left the bay. It has since developed that a secret 
treaty between Spain and Germany provided for 
a transfer of the Philippine Islands to Germany 
in the event of war between Spain and the United 
States, because Spain felt that she would be un- 
able to hold them in case of such a war. The 
presence of the German fleet was to take posses- 
sion of those islands, and Deiterich's action was 
a feeler to see how far he could go, and also to 



54 Anglophobia 

communicate with the Spanish authorities in 
Manila. The excellent markmanship of the 
American gunners jfiring at the Spanish fleet a 
few days previously no doubt is one good reason 
why the German admiral hesitated to accept 
Dewey's invitation to fight. Before he received 
instructions from the Kaiser, Great Britain quiet- 
ly gave Germany to understand that she, Great 
Britain, was prepared to enter the war as an ally 
of the United States in the event that Germany 
formed a war alliance with Spain. 

Only since the beginning of the European war 
has it been possible for Americans to realize the 
awful and sickening possibilities to the United 
States that would have quickly developed if 
Germany had allied with Spain in the Spanish 
war. Great Britain remaining neutral. We all 
realized at the time, with national terror, how 
helpless the eighty millions of the people of the 
United States were for warfare on land ; a m.ere 
handful of regulars and a volunteer army of men 
without training, equipment, experienced officers, 
provisions, transportation or modern armament, 
with 4,000 miles or more of coast line vulnerable 
to the enemy. For naval warfare we had a 
fourth-class fleet, and that divided, nearly one- 
half at Manila, 12,000 miles away from the other 



Blood is Thicker Than Water 55 

half; the coast Hne and sea-board cities were 
practically without defense. 

The present war has taught us something about 
German preparedness for war during the past 
forty odd years. As far back as forty-seven 
years ago they were able to place 325,000 men on 
the French frontier within eighteen days after 
the declaration of war by France, well equipped, 
well provisioned, trained and officered, and with- 
in a few weeks were able to crush the French 
army; and within five days after the declaration 
of the present war by Germany she had 500,000 
well trained soldiers on the march toward the 
frontier of Luxemburg and Belgium supplied 
with the latest improved armament. In the year 
of 1898 she was well prepared for war, as in 
1914. She had the second greatest navy in the 
world. The United States navy at that time was 
classed as the fourth. Almost the entire mer- 
chant marine of Germany was subsidized and 
therefore subject to be used by the Germans as 
transports, or to be converted into cruisers in the 
event of a war. The Spanish navy after destruc- 
tion of eleven vessels at Manila comprised six 
ships under the command of Admiral Cervera, 
and about that many more under the command 
of Admiral Carama. Our North Atlantic fleet 



56 Anglophobia 

was divided into two squadrons, one under the 
command of Admiral Schley guarding the coast 
of New England, the other, under Admiral 
Sampson, scouting the South Atlantic coasts of 
the United States. 

We can all remember the panic of the Ameri- 
can people near the coasts on the Atlantic and the 
Gulf of Mexico when it was learned that the 
Spanish squadron, under Cervera, had left the 
Azores Islands and sailed westerly towards the 
United States; there was no wireles-s telegraphy 
in those days, and there was no way to ascertain 
what part of the long coast-line from the Rio 
Grande, by way of Key West to the north-east 
corner of Maine, the Spanish would strike. 

With three times as many warships as the 
American Atlantic fleet numbered; with more 
than one hundred and fifty transports at their 
command; the ability of Germany to mobilize in 
a short time her army and navy; the total un- 
preparedness of the United States; her Atlantic 
fleet divided into two squadrons ; widely separat- 
ed; it is not difficult to summarize the disasters 
to our country in a coalition of Germany and 
Spain, and continued neutrality of Great Britain, 
and it goes without saying that they could have 
easily landed a large army at almost any point on 



Blood is Thicker Than Water 57 

the Gulf or Atlantic coast that suited their pur- 
pose. Once landed and intrenched on a line se- 
lected by the trained military genius of German 
officers ;supportedby developed artillery and rapid 
firing guns; defended by infantry of that stub- 
born, suljen courage that makes the German sol- 
diers apparently indifferent to danger or death; 
armed with the newest and most destructive pat- 
terns of rifles: the ability of the United States 
army, composed of untrained volunteers, to drive 
the enemy out of the country would be scarcely 
possible. 

The usual tactics of American troops at that 
period, as well as that of the British, two years 
later in the Boer war, was to charge the enemy 
whenever he was encountered, and with but little 
knowledge or examination of the ground over 
which the charge was made. This method 
worked successfully at San Juan Hill in Cuba, 
though at a loss to the Americans in killed and 
wounded of about sixteen hundred men in less 
than four hours of fighting; the Spanish loss was 
about fifteen hundred in that battle. The reck- 
less courage of the American troops ; the strange 
want of care in the commanding officers in as- 
certaining the nature of the ground and obstacles 
and dangers the troops were encountering in that 



58 Anglophobia 

charge, are best shown in liie following extract 
from the official report of General Shafter on 
that engagement : 

"After completing their formation under 
a destructive fire and advancing a short dis- 
tance, both divisions found a wide bottom in 
which had been placed barbed-wire entangle- 
ments, and beyond which the enemy was 
strongly posted. Nothing daunted, these 
gallant men pushed on to drive the enemy 
from his chosen position," etc. 

And there you have the American tactics of 
1898. Charging like mad bulls as soon as they 
could see the enemy or learn his position; with- 
out knowledge or care of barbed-wire entangle- 
ments or exposure to the enemy's fire; no clear- 
ing or opening up a way by artillery fire or fore- 
thought; what would such reckless tactics mean 
to American untrained volunteer troops charg- 
ing a German army entrenched and prepared as 
heretofore indicated? It would mean to them 
suicide, slaughter, butchery ; it would mean wind- 
rows and heaps of American dead and wounded 
soldiers. 



CHAPTER V. 

Unpreparedness Versus Readiness 

To illustrate further and emphasize the danger 
to the United States of the threatened coalition of 
Germany and Spain in the Spanish war of 1898, 
it may be proper to cite additional facts show- 
ing the unpreparedness of our government. On 
February 15th, about two months before the de- 
claration of war, the battleship Maine was blown 
up in Havana Harbor ; both nations realized then 
that war was inevitable. The government of the 
United States, recognizing its utter want of prep- 
aration and desiring to postpone actual hostilities 
until some preparation could be made, instructed 
the minister to Spain, General Stewart L. Wood- 
ford, to use every effort to keep Spain quiet un- 
til the middle of April. 

The following is an extract from an authentic 
statement made by General Woodford, written 
soon after the war: 'The weeks drifted by and 
February 15th, 1898, came, when our battleship 
was blown up in the harbor of Havana. Through 
departments other than the State Department, I 
59 



6o Anglophobia 

received telegraphic information on February 
1 8th that there was not on American ships or in 
the ordnance depots more than two rounds of 
powder per gun or per man. I was therefore 
told to exhaust the arts of peace until April 15th, 
the earliest date at which we could be any where 
near ready for war, and that in any event smoke- 
less powder for both navy and the army would 
be another impossibility. I did the best I could, 
but let me inform you that if it had not been for 
the unfaltering, unchanging and loyal friendship 
of England, and the attitude of her minister at 
Madrid, I might have failed to do the little I did 
do, because the representatives at Madrid of Con- 
tinental Europe were ready at any time to inter- 
fere with the plans of the United States if the 
British minister would only join them." 

At the time that war was declared, April 19, 
1898, the standing army of the United States did 
not exceed 28,000 men of all arms. On April 
23rd, President McKinley issued a call for 125,- 
000 volunteers, and on May 25 he issued another 
call for 75,000 more, aggregating 200,000. The 
time necessary to recruit, concentrate, equip, 
train and get this volunteer army in fighting 
shape has been variously estimated at from three 
to six months. Assuming that it could all be 



Unpreparedness vs. Readiness 6i 

done in three months, the question still remains, 
would that be in time to check a German in- 
vasion of this country if it was attempted? This 
question can best be answered by again alluding 
to some of the incidents of the Franco-Prussian 
war in 1870. As I have already stated, the Ger- 
man government was able to mobilize on the 
French frontier within eighteen days after the 
declaration of war 325,000 troops. Three days 
later the French had an army of 300,000 well 
trained and well equipped troops on that fron- 
tier. The French were prepared for the war. 
Their arsenals were full of ammunition. The 
army was well supplied with Chassepot guns, a 
rapid-firing weapon, and with a new weapon 
called the mitrailleuse, which could fire twenty- 
five bullets at a time; notwithstanding these ad- 
vantages and preparations, the French army 
never recovered from the disadvantage of being 
three days longer than the Germans in mobilizing. 
The strong drive of the German army broke 
through the French line, and within two months 
and three days after the declaration of war the 
German troops had surrounded and begun the 
siege of the city of Paris, after which the defeat 
and destruction of the remaining armies of 
France became a matter of mere detail. Twenty- 



^2 Anglophobia 

seven years passed, leading up to the Spanish- 
American war. The speedy and complete suc- 
cess in the war with France, the billion dollar 
reward as indemnity and acquisition of Alsace 
and German Lorraine, the consolidation of all the 
German states, kingdoms and principalities into 
one mighty empire, evolved in the brain of the 
German rulers the dreams of world-wide dom- 
ination. 

That they were casting covetous looks at South 
American territory was evidenced by the ominous 
growl of the old war-dog Bismarck, when he de- 
nounced the Monroe Doctrine as the ''most ar- 
rogant piece of national impudence that was ever 
uttered." During this period the standing army 
and navy of the empire was gradually increased 
in size and efficiency; her war-chest filled with 
gold; arms and ammunition of the latest im- 
proved kind constantly on hand; her wonder- 
ful system of espionage and secret service, per- 
meating and exploring the territory of every na- 
tion or country in Europe and America, and por- 
tions of Asia and Africa, including that of her 
allies — learning the topography, military secrets 
and strength and preparedness of each, their 
revenues, warships, harbors, fortifications, and a 
thousand other details that might be useful in the 



Unpreparedness vs. Readiness 63 

future domination, conquest or destruction of 
these countries or nationalities that the interest 
of the empire might require. And how about the 
United States during all those twenty-seven 
years? A great, big-hearted nation, open-mind- 
ed, with no military, naval or diplomatic secrets 
of her own, and not desiring to know those of 
other nations; unsuspicious, friendly and peace- 
ful, her people charitable and sympathetic, hand- 
ing out their countless thousands of dollars to re- 
lieve the stricken and distressed in every part of 
the world. Brave, high-minded America; her 
guns rusting, ammunition exhausted, every in- 
crease of her navy begrudged and opposed by a 
demagogue faction in Congress. What chance 
would she have had in a conflict with Germany 
with her standing army of near a half million of 
well-trained soldiers at the time of the Spanish 
war, with more than a million well-trained reserv- 
ists within military age who had already served 
their time of enlistment? I answer that question 
by asking another— what chance would that 
peaceful, big-hearted giant have as he walked 
abroad, a kindly smile lighting up his features, his 
hands in his pockets to hand out alms to the needy 
beggar, meeting a low-browed enemy with re- 
volvers strapped to his waist, murder in his heart, 



64 Anglophobia 

quick to draw and of deadly aim, hunting his vic- 
tim? 

What really happened, and what might have re- 
sulted to the two countries if England had not 
quietly intimated to Germany, "hands off," will be 
developed hereafter. 

Having shown how well prepared Germany 
was for an invasion of the United States if she 
had entered the war as an ally of Spain in 1898, 
and how unprepared the United States was to 
resist such invasion, it is proper to investigate the 
motives and purposes, if any, of the German 
Government in entering into a coalition with 
Spain, and the reason, if any, why she would de- 
sire to prosecute a destructive war against a 
peaceful nation; a nation for which she had al- 
ways professed good-will and friendship; a na- 
tion with which so many thousands of her own 
people had affiliated as citizens. The great in- 
centive to such a course can be found in the bit- 
ter and cruel hatred excited in the minds of the 
governing classes of Germany against any na- 
tionality that opposed or in any manner inter- 
fered with her schemes or plans for dominating 
and Germanizing the world. A striking illustra- 
tion of such a disposition is found in the differ- 
ence in their treatment of the Grand Duchy of 



Unpreparedness vs. Readiness 65 

Luxemburg and the kingdom of Belgium by the 
Teutonic rulers during the present European war. 
At the commencement of the war the friendship 
of Germany for the two countries was the same. 
The young Grand Duchess of Luxemburg 
strongly and vigorously protested against the vio- 
lation of the neutrality of her country by the pas- 
sage of German troops through it, but offered no 
resistance, and the lives, liberty and property of 
her people were not destroyed or materially im- 
paired by the Germany army. Belgium resisted 
the violation of her neutrality and the devasta- 
tion and ruin of her country and people followed. 
The German war policy of "f rightfulness" adopt- 
ed and pursued by her ostensibly to terrify and 
intimidate the Belgians and suppress resistance 
was in fact prompted by feelings of revenge and 
hatred engendered by the Belgian resistance. 
The hatred of Germany for England concentrat- 
ed and expressed in her national "Hymn of 
Hate" was not on account of losses in killed and 
wounded at, before and after the battle of the 
Marne, but because she was thwarted by Eng- 
land in her desire to establish naval bases on the 
North Sea and English Channel by the conquest 
of Belgium and North-eastern France; by check- 
ing the aspirations of Germany through her line 



66 Anglophobia 

of railway to Bagdad, to control the trade of Per- 
sia, Afghanistan and eventually India ; and also by 
supporting and upholding the Monroe Doctrine 
of the United States ; as well as because of Eng- 
land's superior navy, commercial rivalry, etc. 
The vigorous colonial policy instigated by Bis- 
mark was his favorite scheme to promote world- 
wide domination of the empire; but this colonial 
policy came too late to accomplish that purpose; 
all of the desirable and available territory of the 
world for colonization had long been annexed by 
other European powers; the only territory that 
Germany would be able to annex was portions 
of East and West Africa, the territory of Kiau- 
Chau in China and a few islands in the Pacific 
Ocean. The vast fertile region in South Ameri- 
ca practically unoccupied — described in part by 
ex-President Roosevelt in his account of his re- 
cent explorations of South America — was denied 
to her by the hated Monroe doctrine. In the 
absence of that doctrine, how easy with Ger- 
many's perfection of statecraft and intrigue and 
wealth would it have been for her to interfere 
in, or manipulate the revolutions that were al- 
ways existing in these unhappy countries, to her 
own advantage; thereby either acquiring terri- 
tory or establishing such an influence as would 



Unpreparedness vs. Readiness 67 

amount to actual ownership. How easy to have 
acquired control of the bankrupt French com- 
pany and built and controlled the Panama Canal, 
enabling her to extend her influence and power 
to the western republics of Chile, Peru, and Ecua- 
dor. How easy to acquire by purchase or con- 
quest Cuba and Porto Rico from the feeble and 
decaying Spanish government. It is impossible 
even for the dullest intellect not to perceive the 
vast and wonderful possibilities for expansion, 
territorial, political, financial and commercial, 
that would be offered to the German government 
by the abrogation of the Monroe Doctrine. As 
well would it be impossible for even the strongest 
intellect to conceive or summarize all of these pos- 
sibilities and advantages ; the ordinary mind stag- 
gers at the attempt to grasp them. 

When Germany declined to proclaim her neu- 
trality in the Spanish-American war, it fore- 
shadowed conclusively that she would take a part 
in that war, as ally to one of the other belliger- 
ents. Everything goes to show that it is not the 
United States, but Spain, that she proposed to 
help. Outside of the proof furnished by the con- 
duct of the commander of the German fleet at 
Manila Bay, and of her representative at Madrid 
disclosed by ex-Minister Woodford, her secret 



68 Anglophobia 

hatred for the United States growing out of the 
bar to her ambition by reason of the Monroe Doc- 
trine, existing up to and evidenced by her secret 
intrigue with Mexico and Japan, was amply suf- 
ficient to show whose ally she proposed to be in 
that war. It cannot be said that at and before 
the commencement of that war she had not 
accurately sized up the situation and her certainty 
of being able to defeat the American army, as it 
then existed. It is not possible that she could be 
blind to all the advantages accruing to her by such 
an alliance, if Great Britain remained neutral. 
Any person making such an assertion, shows that 
he has been utterly oblivious of current and re- 
cent history exhibiting the singleness of purpose 
of the German government, its miraculous fore- 
sightedness, its supernatural intrigue, and espion- 
age, its diabolical ingenuity in preparing means, 
weapons and occasions for the destruction of 
human life; such a critic in his bhnd admiration 
for German "Kultur" shows that he has been in a 
state of somnabulism since August, 1914, a sleep- 
walker, passing through life perfectly and wilful- 
ly oblivious to events and happenings that even 
inanimate nature has responded to. 



CHAPTER VI. 

It Might Have Been 

An effort has been made in the preceding chap- 
ters to summarize the military conditions of this 
country as they existed at the beginning of the 
Spanish-American war in the spring of 1898, as 
well as the attitude of the German government to- 
ward that war, and her preparedness and absolute 
certainty of victory if she concluded to intervene 
in behalf of Spain — Great Britain remaining neu- 
tral — pointing out the strong inducements, rea- 
sons and motives urging her to form a coalition 
with Spain ; her desire and at one time her bona- 
fide intention to do so. 

This leads to a recital of the supposed or hypo- 
thetical conflict between Germany and the United 
States, and the invasion of the latter country by 
the armies of Germany and Spain, the defeat of 
the Americans and occupation of portions of the 
country ; and in the light of the fate of Belgium 
and North France since their occupation by the 
German army, to state in part the particular dis- 
asters, suffering and ruin to the people of our 

69 



70 Anglophobia 

country by such invasion and military occupation. 
The savage cruelty and barbarity attendant upon 
German conquest of a countiy in 191 4 would 
have attended such a conquest in 1898. What 
she did to the helpless people of Belgium^ and 
France, she was ready and anxious to do to the 
people of the United States in 1898 if she had 
the chance. The same conditions exciting the 
hatred, malice and revenge of the German rul- 
ing military caste existed at each period. For 
want of an opportunity to exhibit the fiendish 
blood-thirsty nature of a certain type of German 
officers and soldiers, m.ankind had no conception 
of it until it was exhibited in the tragedies that 
quickly followed the occupation of Belgium and 
Northern France. The type referred to is sepa- 
rate and distinct from the kindly, peaceable and 
industrious class of Germans who affiliate readily 
with the democracy of the countries to which they 
migrate and often become the trusted friends and 
neighbors of Americans. This type differs from 
the pure-blooded German physically, mentally, 
and morally. They are easily recognizable by 
their sullen, brutal faces, flat heads and cruel 
expression indicative of their Hunnish origin. 
They have no more humanity than the gorilla; 
they would shoot down their own fathers, mo- 



It Might Have Been 71 

thers, children, or brothers, if ordered to do so by 
those in command of them. The Huns who con- 
quered the German tribes of Central and West- 
em Europe in the fifth century were not Ger- 
mans but Kalmucks, or Monguls from Central 
Asia. In the invasion they were led by Attila 
the Great, called the "Scourge of God" be- 
cause of the inhuman savage barbarities commit- 
ted by his followers. Although they settled in 
the conquered territory and mingled and inter- 
bred with the conquered German tribes the two 
races never amalgamated; the Mogul breed still 
reverts to type, although infused with the blood 
of other races. In many sections of Prussia the 
Hunnish type predominates. It is, and has al- 
ways been, the chief support of Kaiserism, and 
militarism, the willing and bloody tools of ty- 
rants; the Prussian instrumentality of "f rightful- 
ness." With officers of the same breed they are 
left to garrison the towns and villages of the ter- 
ritory overrun by the German troops, while the 
best and bravest of the army go to the front. It 
is this kind of armed and trained creatures of 
German ambition that would have been detailed 
to garrison the cities, towns and villages of the 
United States in 1898 if this country had been in- 
vaded. 



72 Anglophobia 

It might not be improper at this point for the 
benefit of the Anglophobist of English descent 
to visualize as happening in America some of 
the horrible atrocities committed on the helpless 
people of Belgium and North France by those 
Prussian garrisons. Take the ordinary Ameri- 
can town or village, inhabited by refined and edu- 
cated people; raised in an atmosphere of free- 
dom and liberty, safe under the protection of law 
and officers from injury and imposition, the 
young men independent, self-respecting and 
brave, young ladies of the usual American beauty 
and culture ; the people all at peace, living in lux- 
urious homes, elegantly furnished; comforts and 
luxuries of life in abundance. Perhaps it is your 
condition, Mr. Anglophobist, and no doubt you 
have in mind the individuals just described, or 
people like them. You hear the dull roar of dis- 
tant cannonading; it comes nearer. You see 
bodies of American volunteer troops passing 
through retreating; then the dark grey uniforms 
of the Teuton soldiers who pass on leaving a gar- 
rison of demons to carry out the amiable will of 
the beloved Kaiser, which means inaugurating an 
orgy of crime, robbery, arson, and looting; old 
men and women ranged up against a stone wall 
and shot by a platoon of soldiers on some pre- 



It Might Have Been 73 

tejct, houses blown up or burned after looting, 
young ladies dragged away, never to be heard of 
again; the highways crowded with frightened 
fugitives fleeing from the wrath of the invader; 
old men tottering along with the aged wife; little 
children, some of them mere babies, their parents 
dead or vanished, with pitiful little bundles of 
clothing, tired, hungry, thirsty, crying, sleeping 
and dying by the road-side. Man can think and 
write or speak of tragedies like those of Belgium 
five thousand miles off in an impersonal way, 
with sorrow, and sympathy for the unfortunate; 
but when it comes to thinking of such things hap- 
pening to our own people, our horror becomes 
unspeakable. The fate of one town such as I have 
described would have been that of five hundred 
or one thousand other American towns that 
would have been occupied by the German army 
if she had invaded the country as an ally of 
Spain. 

The atrocities mentioned are not merely imag- 
inary or manufactured for effect; each of them 
has occurred in Belgium and France, and hun- 
dreds of other kinds, times without number in 
scores of places, so brutal, fiendish and cruel as 
would move the recording Angel to throw down 
his pen in disgust at the horror of it. 



74 Anglophobia 

Not the least of all the calamities to the Unit- 
ed States of such a German invasion would have 
been the terrible loss in killed and wounded to our 
army in battles with the German troops. I do 
not underestimate the courage of Americans, but 
without organization, training and proper equip- 
ment, such courage would not only be useless, 
but would in fact lend aid to their destruction. 
The wail of distress and cries for help coming 
from stricken towns and country writhing under 
the cruelty and oppressions of the Hunnish brutes 
would have aroused the American manhood to 
perfect frenzy ; and totally unfitted them for the 
training and preparation that would enable them 
to cope with the enemy; causing them to rush 
upon the enemy without organization, poorly 
armed, to be cut down like grass by a reaper, 
their bodies piled up like cord-wood before Ger- 
man trenches. 

The moral to be deduced from thus stressing 
the evils that threatened our country in 1898 is, 
that those calamities were averted by Great Brit- 
ain through her friendship for, and stand taken, 
in behalf of the United States, and which caused 
Germany to give up her purposes. There are 
thousands of middle-aged Americans who today 
owe their lives to England ; men who would have 



It Might Have Been 75 

been slaughtered by the Germans in the war pre- 
vented by Great Britain. And it is a sad reflec- 
tion upon the gratitude they owed to England, 
that eighteen months afterwards when the Boer 
war broke out many mass meetings were held 
in many places in the United States for the pur- 
pose of expressing sympathy with the Boers and 
denouncing England, and thousands of Ameri- 
cans made their way to South Africa to enlist in 
the Boer army, many of whom would have died 
by German bullets a year and a half -before in 
America, but for the English. And it is a monu- 
ment to the magnanimity of the British that 
whenever they took any of these American 
prisoners, instead of sending them to prison 
camps they would offer to parole them and give 
them transportation back to America. 

Soon after the Boer war I was told by an in- 
telligent English physician that although England 
made no complaint of the actions of Americans 
in siding against her, nothing in the history 
of all her foreign relations had ever happened 
that hurt the great heart of the English people 
like that display of ingratitude by Americans. 

The destruction of life and property in the 
United States, just mentioned, and the suffering 
of the people, attendant upon a German invasion 



76 Anglophobia 

in 1898, although far greater than described, are 
things that could all be effaced by the lapse of 
tim<e; a new generation of people would live, the 
destroyed cities and towns rebuilt — the physical 
scars of the war would be healed over in a gene- 
ration or two, and its great calamities would Hve 
only in history and tradition; the murdered peo- 
ple and those who mourned them all reunited in 
the spirit-land; but the effect ot such a war upon 
governments, nationalities and human liberty ter- 
minating in Teutonic victory and defeat of the 
United States army, would outlast the present 
civilization of the world. It would have changed 
the maps of North and South America, and would 
have opened up a short road to world domination 
to the Germans. It would have left the United 
States without a navy, burdened for a generation 
with a war indemnity, an indemnity which would 
have been not less than three billion dollars; 
three times that exacted of France in 1871, 
which would have been no harder on the United 
States, as the wealth of France in 1871 was not 
one-third of the wealth of the United States in 
1898. With this vast sum of money Germany 
would be able in a short time to construct the 
greatest navy in the world; with the Monroe 
Doctrine abrogated and forever renounced by the 



It Might Have Been 17 

United States, which would have been one of the 
terms of peace exacted of her by the conquering 
Teutons, the German Empire would commence 
its policy of expansion under the most favorable 
conditions. To forestall any obstacles that the 
people of the United States might thereafter in- 
terpose to such expansion in America, she would 
doubtless, as she has recently suggested to Mexi- 
co, have restored to Mexico the territory taken 
from her in 1848, as well as that lost by the in- 
dependence of Texas, which would necessarily 
become German territory or under her suzerainty, 
as it would soon be found to be impossible for 
Mexico to hold it against the American inhabit- 
ants, into which territory would be invited all of 
the disaffected elements in the United States, in- 
cluding the hyphenates, the Teutonic, the pro- 
German and Anglophobists. These elements, 
especially the last named, could then have had the 
opportunity of comparing existence under the 
common law of England in force in the United 
States, with German autocracy and militarism, en- 
forced by bayonets in the hands of those ami- 
able and mild mannered Huns. 

When one listens sometimes to the ill-con- 
sidered babble of some of the pro-German Ameri- 
cans, slurring at England and the United States, 



78 Anglophobia 

he conceives a half formed wish that such an in- 
dividual might have a taste of German "Kultur" 
by being compelled to live in territory and under 
conditions as just described. 

With the unlimited revenue that the German 
government could have received from war in- 
demnities, fines levied upon and collected from 
cities and towns and countries she might invade; 
public property and revenues of nations and prin- 
cipalities subjugated by her, she would soon have 
prepared an army and navy that would be in- 
vincible and irresistible. England would no 
longer be mistress of the seas; her navy would 
soon have been destroyed or subdued and her 
provinces and colonies, Canada, Australia, India, 
would one by one fall under Teutonic rule with 
all that such rule implies. 

It has been asserted that all conjectures as to 
the conditions and events that would have fol- 
lowed and resulted from the intervention of Ger- 
many in the Spanish-American war, and con- 
tinued neutrality of England, are purely chimeri- 
cal and improbable. In the light of Germany's 
unrelenting and unscrupulous ambitious plans 
and intrigues for dominating the world, the per- 
fection of her military preparedness as disclosed 
by the present European war, one is utterly un- 



It Might Have Been 79 

able to imagine a solitary reason why such sur- 
mises are not correct as to what would have hap- 
pened to this country and the civilized world if 
Germany had intervened in behalf of Spain, and 
no person is able to think of any reason why 
Germany did not do so, except the attitude of 
England and her superior navy. Ordinarily, it 
is unprofitable mental exertion to discuss or dwell 
on the "might have beens," because the past is 
unchangeable and its events are immutable; but 
when a kindness or friendly act is known to have 
averted disaster or ruin, such an episode should 
be kept ever green and fresh in memory, not only 
as inspiring that noblest of all emotions, grati- 
tude, but to preserve the knowledge gained by ex- 
perience. 

In days to come, if civilization survives this 
war and tlie length and breadth, heighth and 
depth of Teutonic cruelty and barbarity have been 
sounded and measured, Americans will be better 
able to realize what England did for their 
.country in her hour of national peril. 



CHAPTER VII. 

Some Law-makers and Some Lawyers 
Affected 

There is another group of Anglophobists whose 
superficial attainments would hardly entitle them 
to notice in a grave and earnest treatise, and who 
might with propriety be omitted from this analy- 
sis — but for the fact that their extreme loquacity 
and spectacular mental exploits sometimes af- 
fect the opinions of people of real good sense 
who have not taken the pains to inform them- 
selves on some particular subject — this class of 
anti-English people from nature or habit are ob- 
sessed with the idea that in order to attract at- 
tention to themselves and impress others with 
their sagacity and deep penetration, it is neces- 
sary to differ from public opinion or from the ma- 
jority of the people upon all subjects of public in- 
terest. They delight to pose as profound think- 
ers, and as having gone deeper into the particular 
subject than the common run of people. It is 
immaterial which side of a question they take, 
just so their position appears to be unique. Hay-. 
80 



Some Law-makers 8i 

ing no other reason for their opinion they are 
totally without argument to support their conten- 
tions. When their positions are challenged, when 
they think it necessary to support their side of a 
question they will, like Mark Twain's **01d Sea 
Captain," serenely and deliberately manufacture 
history, statistics and incidents out of hand, and 
will blandly contradict or ignore the undisputed 
facts of ancient, modern or current history. One 
of the commonest reasons given by this class of 
English haters for their dislike is, that England 
never fights her own wars, but manages to have 
other nations to do her fighting, or language to 
the same eflfect, which involves a denial that 
Great Britain ever engaged in a war alone or 
aided by actual fighting in any war between other 
nations; in other words, they never admit that 
there was a Waterloo or England's part in it, 
though undisputed history places the loss of the 
British in twelve hours' sustained fighting at 13,- 
000 men, and the loss of Bonaparte's army at the 
hands of the British troops alone at more than 
40,000 in killed and wounded. They never seem 
to have heard of the Peninsula campaign which 
commenced in 1808, where for more than five 
years England alone, except with the feeble as- 
sistance of a few disheartened Portuguese and 



82 Anglophobia 

Spanish soldiers, grappled with the legions of 
Bonaparte, finally driving Joseph Bonaparte 
from the Spanish throne, leaving on the battle- 
fields countless thousands of dead Englishmen, 
dying for the liberties of the world in resisting 
autocracy, as they are doing today. A remarkable 
feature of this kind of Anglophobist is that 
many of them are educated people; some are 
school teachers, doctors, lawyers, with occasional- 
ly a preacher. Three or four weeks after the 
battle of the Somme began, and while progress- 
ing in all its fury, a school teacher of this type 
observed to a citizen of my acquaintance that 
England welcomed the advent of the United 
States into the war, for the reason that the Unit- 
ed States would now do England's share of the 
fighting. When that remark was made, and for 
more than three weeks preceding, a constant 
stream of English blood had been poured out on 
the soil of France, and heaps of English dead 
marked the route of their advance; even some 
of the little tots in the kindergarten were talking 
of the great battle that England was fighting. 
The teacher, however, seemed to have been ut- 
terly oblivious to that awful conflict and to any 
other incident of any other war that exhibited 
the personal courage of the British soldiers. This 



Some Law-makers 83 

particular teacher is an accomplished reader or 
elocutionist, and can recite Tennyson's "Charge 
of the Light Brigade" in a manner that is thril- 
ling, but has evidently never learned that the 
famous "six hundred" were English cavalry. 

After careful study of the historical accounts 
of the scores of wars in which England has been 
engaged since the days of William the Conqueror 
— over 800 years — there can be found but one 
instance that in any manner justifies the charge 
that England always got other nations to do her 
fighting. That instance should, from an Ameri- 
can point of view, be creditable to the English 
people. In 1776, George III was hard pressed 
for troops for his American war. Englishmen 
refused to volunteer to fight their kinsmen in the 
colonies. The King did not dare to resort to 
conscription, as such a method of recruiting his 
army to fight against Americans of English 
blood, would have enflamed the people to such a 
degree as would have endangered the govern- 
ment itself. So King George hired from the Duke 
of Brunswick 4,300 Brunswick soldiers and 12,- 
000 Hessians. In using this incident to prove their 
assertion that Great Britain never fights her own 
battles if she can hire others to do it, these Eng- 
lish-haters display their usual perspicacity in fail- 



84 Anglophobia 

ing to note that the circumstances compelling 
King George to hire these Hessians discloses the 
kindly feeling of the English people toward the 
colonies, which ought to appeal to every fair- 
minded American, and no just and true American 
ought to cite the Hessian incident in disparage- 
ment of the English people of that day. 

Occasionally men of the same order of intel- 
lect of this group of English-haters, by some 
strange political accident or freakish popular im- 
pulse find themselves elected to Congress; they 
soon find an intellectual environment that is new 
to them, and issues and subjects of legislation 
that they have never heard of before. Realizing 
that their lack of knowledge of national affairs 
and limited natural ability will fail to keep them- 
selves prominently before the country and they 
will soon lapse into obscurity and remain incon- 
spicuous, they begin to way-lay the course of 
legislation, until some measure especially desir- 
able to the majority of the members and of ur- 
gent necessity to the country is brought forward, 
when they immediately spring forward as from 
an ambush, in opposition to it, get their names 
in the newspapers and their remarks printed and 
strut about in the lime-light of their cheap no tor- 



Some Law-makers §5 

iety, which they confound with popular applause 
and approval. 

When no other opportunity to be conspicuous 
presents itself, these Anglophobian law-givers 
will assail the war methods of England and de- 
nounce her blockade of German ports, seizing 
vessels, detaining and searching them for contra- 
band, seizing and examining mail on its way to 
Germany, etc. They never, howe^^er, allude to 
the fact that England pays the owner for the 
goods she seizes and that the vessels are released 
unless it is proven in the English prize court that 
the cargo is entirely contraband intended for 
Germany. These statesmen are especially care- 
ful never to ruffle the feelings of Germany by al- 
luding to the destruction of the Lusitania and 
hundreds of other ships, involving the loss of 
thousands of lives, as well as cargoes. As stated 
by Senator Williams of Mississippi : "They never 
learn the difference between a prize court and a 
torpedo." 

A few lawyers can be found among this class 
of Anglophobists, although it appears to be an 
incongruity for an American lawyer to have a 
dislike for England and the English government. 
By the term American lawyer is meant, not the 
half-read shyster who helps to pervert and con- 



86 Anglophobia 

fuse the law of the land, but the lawyer who is 
well grounded in the principles that rule human 
conduct, declaring what is right and prohibiting 
what is wrong; rules that are prescribed by a 
superior power, and designed for the protection of 
life, liberty and property, and to promote justice 
between man and man. I refer to the man who 
by close and honest study of those rules of right 
and justice — like the Christian who studies the 
Bible — unconsciously assimilates those principles 
into his very nature so that they become the guid- 
ing force of his own life and conduct, making it 
impossible for him to be unjust, dishonest, or op- 
pressive towards his fellow men. 

These beneficent rules for the guidance of life 
and conduct of the citizen and for the administra- 
tion of justice in the tribunals, the American 
lawyer learns from the common law of England — 
a system of jurisprudence governing every state 
in the Union except where it conflicts with some 
law; it is one of the most vital forces of the 
Anglo-Saxon people, it is as necessary to their 
virility as breath is to life. They will live under 
no other system of laws. The first Congress of 
the Republic of Texas, held after her independ- 
ence was established in 1840 — adopted the com- 



Some Law-makers 87 

ruon law of England as the rule of decision to re- 
main in force in Texas until altered by the legis- 
lature; other states have always been under the 
system. It is as ancient as the civilization of our 
race; dating back to the time "Whereof the 
memory of man runneth not to the contrary"; 
our forefathers obeyed it, helped to enforce it, 
relied on it for protection of Hfe and liberty and 
in pursuit of happiness, just as we do today in 
every state in the Union. Its principles and 
rules have been evolved through earnest and con- 
scientious desire for justice and right between 
the citizens, for the protection of the innocent 
and punishment of the guilty. In the expres- 
sions of eminent English jurists declaring and 
administering the common law, used centuries 
ago, can be discerned an earnest and conscientious 
purpose and desire to ascertain and enforce what 
was just and right in the particular case under 
consideration. 

Imagine the American lawj^er in his own proper 
court, in a case where it is his right and to his 
advantage to invoke a rule of the common law 
of England; listen to his eulogies on the system 
of jurisprudence ; he declares it to be the perfec- 
tion of human reasoning and natural justice 



88 Anglophobia 

founded upon the eternal principles of right. He 
reads extracts from Blackstone and other com- 
mentators and from opinions of eminent and re- 
nowned English jurists upholding, enforcing, 
sustaining and construing the common law of 
England; and if his particular case demands, he 
will refer to the human spirit of the common law 
and the tender regard it entertains for the rights 
of the poor, the weak, the helpless and unfortun- 
ate. He extols the nature and attributes of the 
race of mankind who could involve such a system 
of laws evidencing their love of civil and religious 
liberty, their sense of justice and veneration of 
Deity. He declares — and truthfully — that no in- 
ferior, enervated, cowardly or subservient race 
of people could evolve such a system of laws, or 
breed the class of men that have upheld it against 
the assaults of tyrants and autocracy. And after- 
wards, when you hear that same lawyer of Anglo- 
Saxon name and blood, slurring at the English 
people and government, referring to them as ar- 
rogant, overbearing, tyrannical, unjust by nature 
and practice, looking to their own sordid advan- 
tages, having no regard for the rights of others, 
too cowardly to fight their own battles, etc. — it 
sounds inconsistent and incongruous, and for a 



Some Law-makers 89 

lawyer, who ought to know better, is in exceeding 
bad taste ; like one who slurs at the parents who 
have brought him into the world and nurtured 
him in helpless infancy, or like "a bird that be- 
fouls its own nest." 



CHAPTER VIII. 

American Military Caste — Contraband — 
Embargo 

One of the most striking and, at first blush, the 
most unaccountable anomalies discoverable in the 
classes of people discussed in this treatise, is the 
pro-German of English blood in America ; it will 
be observed that various individuals of this class 
have separate and distinct reasons for this pro- 
German leaning ; with all however their partiality 
and admiration for Germany naturally creates in 
them an antipathy for England. 

Close attention to the conversation and remarks 
of these pro-Germans will disclose that a large 
majority of them constitute a military caste dis- 
tinct from the military and naval circles of the 
United States. They regard military virtue as 
the most exalted and the most important of all in- 
tellectual and moral qualities ; and military prep- 
aration and success as the very acme of human 
achievement. It is difficult to assign a satisfac- 
tory reason why any man in civil life in America, 
raised amidst peaceable and kindly environments, 
90 



American Military Caste 9^ 

could conceive such a love for the art of killing 
people or love for a nationality that makes it its 
business to kill people. One explanation is here- 
dity: that their instincts and tastes hark back 
to ancestors of the half savage age, when war and 
bloodshed and conquest was the principal indus- 
try of mankind. Another is that the individual 
or some ancestor or relative has attained some 
little military renown, which has innoculated the 
blood of the family with the disease of militarism. 
Those having a literary taste have read histories 
of wars, studied battle-fields and the strategy prac- 
tised by opposing generals ; they have read ''Na- 
poleon and his Marshals," "Washington and his 
Generals," and other books and descriptions «f 
war, warriors and victorious generals, until their 
whole nature is steeped in militarism; they are 
ready to voice their approval of a victorious army 
regardless of the merits of the national quarrel, 
and are ready to criticize, blame and condemn 
the vanquished. They are contemptuous and dis- 
paraging of a nation that is defeated because of 
her unpreparedness, and have a worshipful ad- 
miration for the nation that is prepared to strike 
a deadly blow at a moment's notice. They re- 
gard military preparedness as a national virtue 
far exceeding the qualities of mercy, charity, 



92 Anglophobia 

benevolence, or honor. They regard it far more 
praiseworthy to annihilate a battaHon through a 
strategic move than to found and maintain a 
hospital for the poor and afflicted. 

From reading and study of battles, of killed 
and wounded, their minds and sensibilities have 
become debauched by familiarity — in thought and 
imagination — with carnage, bloodshed and suf- 
fering, until they have become cruel and heart- 
less; they have become thoroughly Prussianized 
and speak bitterly and offensively of England, 
because of her unpreparedness for the present 
war, saying that she deserves defeat and all of 
the loss and suffering of her people for not being 
prepared. They sided with Germany in all dis- 
putes with the United States regarding the des- 
truction of the Lusitania and other vessels by 
German submarines. They declare that if Ger- 
many has the ability through relentless submarine 
warfare to reduce England to submission, it is 
her perfect right to do so, even though neutral 
passenger ships and inoffensive non-combatants 
are destroyed. They do not believe that the Al- 
mighty has any special control or supervision over 
the affairs or fates of nations, or any power over 
the result of battles ; they subscribe to the favor- 
ite aphorism of Napoleon Bonaparte, that 



American Military Caste 93 

"Heaven has always been found favorable to 
strong battalions." 

They believe that might is right, and that this 
world ought to be ruled by the nation that is 
mightiest in warfare, and is possessed of means 
and instrumentalities for the greatest destruction 
of human life. They applaud the German genius 
and "Kultur" that perfected the submarine and 
torpedo, and the invention and use of liquid fire 
and poisonous gases; in short, they assert that 
no consideration for humanity, preservation of 
life, or for international agreement or law should 
in any degree limit warring nations in the use of 
any means or methods of destroying human life 
and habitation that they may think necessary to 
achieve victory over the enemy. 

This class of men should be regarded as 
more dangerous to this country than any other 
kind of English hater, for many of them are edu- 
cated and influential citizens, some few are poli- 
ticians. It is true that the Federal law relating 
to treason and treasonable utterances has, since 
the declaration of war against Germany, shorn 
this class of men of power to do much harm to 
our country; but there still remains to them the 
power and privilege of slurring the English peo- 
ple, and thereby to poison the minds of American 



94 Anglophobia 

boys who will soon be sent to France. In many 
instances this Prussianism with all the evils and 
disaster to the human race which that term im- 
plies, and which has been absorbed by the class 
of Americans just described, will descend to and 
be assimilated by their children and be pei*petu- 
ated in future generations. If the allies are vic- 
torious in this war, and put an eternal end to 
autocracy and militarism, such Prussian ideas 
and ideals can have but little effect, and will be 
but a slight menace to civilization; no more in 
fact than an active partisanship in the rivalry 
between Julius Caesar and Pompey in this age. 
But this class of pro-Germans will never 
again become good Americans. They have 
drifted too far from American ideals and prin- 
ciples, and should the allies go down in this strug- 
gle, such a strong element of Prussianized Ameri- 
cans in this country will be a canker in the heart 
of democracy. 

The next class of Anglophobists in the order 
selected for analysis, ground their dislike upon 
incidents happening since the beginning of the 
present European war. With the exception of a 
few politicians — who have tried to use this class 
or lead it purely for political advantage — they are 
anti-English solely upon pecuniary grounds, and 



American Military Caste 95 

because some commodity produced, or owned by 
them or in which they speculate, has been dimin- 
ished in value by the maritime policy of Great 
Britain in force since the war began ; the most of 
them have but little knowledge and precious little 
respect for the laws of nations, or what is com- 
monly termed international law ; they regard it as 
a vague, misty half-formed understanding — or 
misunderstanding — of some of the civilized na- 
tions of the world to do, or not to do, certain 
things ; laws without any penalty or power of en- 
forcement; binding upon the conscience, only in 
cases where there is a conscience, and in no case 
to be considered when they are in conflict with 
the interest or inclination of a nation or in- 
dividual. 

It may be remarked in passing that this is the 
Teutonic conception of international law. But 
with all other civilized nations, especially with 
Great Britain and the United States, it is a 
recognized system of jurisprudence, embracing 
every condition or question likely to arise be- 
tween nations, whether arising during peace or 
during war. These laws are not codified and 
promulgated by a legislative power as state or 
national laws are created with penalties attached ; 
there is no tribunal clothed with power or au- 



9^ Anglophobia 

thority to enforce conformity to these laws by 
punishment of the violators. Obedience and con- 
formity to them rests upon the honor of each 
nation, and their construction is based upon prin- 
ciples of strict justice, and due consideration of 
the rights of other nations, strong or weak. While 
not codified, the international laws are contained 
in a large number of text books and treatises ; in 
the customs and usage of nations in particular 
cases; in decision and rulings of the prize courts 
of different nationalities. Every law student is re- 
quired to study and be examined upon this branch 
of the law before being admitted to the bar. 

The system, like every other system of laws 
evolved from human intelligence, is constantly 
developing towards perfection. National con- 
duct in respect to certain matters, recognized and 
approved by international law one hundred years 
ago as permissible, is now disapproved by that 
system ; especially have such innovations occurred 
in those rules regulating the commerce between 
neutral and belligerent nations in the time of war 
— where there is no strict or close blockade by 
one belligerent nation of the ports of the other — 
it is perfectly natural that two nations may hon- 
estly differ in respect to what is the law in a par- 
ticular case where a change in the law has de- 



American Military Caste 97 

veloped; one nation may insist on the rule as it 
existed, and the other may insist on the law as 
changed by common consent, custom and usage 
of nations. Such a difference of construction does 
not necessarily argue want of national integrity 
or fairness on the part of either. A very apt and 
appropriate illustration of such a disagreement is 
found in the arrest, search and detention by Great 
Britain, with in most instances a trial in an Eng- 
lish prize court, of neutral vessels from neutral 
ports, bound for Holland, Denmark or Sweden, 
resulting sometimes in the condemnation of these 
vessels and cargoes, in whole or in part, — the 
United States insisting that such conduct was a 
violation of the rights of neutrals under the pro- 
visions of international law. 

The United States, while conceding the right of 
Great Britain as a belligerent to declare what 
articles or commodities should be prohibited as 
contraband, from a neutral country to Germany, 
and the right of search for and seizure of such 
contraband on neutral vessels on the high seas, 
contends that such right of search and seizure ex- 
ists only when the vessel i^ bound for some Ger- 
man seaport, and not when it is for a neutral port. 
Replying, Great Britain declares that if the con- 
traband is intended for Germany it is subject to 



98 Anglophobia 

seizure on the high seas although actually bound 
for a neutral port, and cites a case occurring dur- 
ing our civil war, wherein the United States over- 
hauled a ship-load of war munitions on the high 
seas which was en route from England to Jamaica 
• — a neutral countr^^ and her dependency — claim- 
ing that the munitions were really intended for 
the Confederate States and designed to be 
shipped on blockade runners from Jamaica to the 
Southern Confederacy. 

The ship and its cargo were taken to the Unit- 
ed States, condemned in her prize court and con- 
fiscated. Great Britain further claims that the 
contraband goods seized by her and confiscated 
were condemned in her prize courts upon full and 
conclusive proof that such goods were en route 
to Germany ; goods when owned by neutrals were 
invariably paid for by her. So there you have a 
stand off, both nations claiming to be acting with- 
in the law, but honestly differing as to what it 
is. Quite a number of Americans who were 
cotton raisers or merchants who were carrying 
cotton raisers, and cotton speculators led by a 
few clamorous politicians, instigated a furious 
propaganda against Great Britain, and inci- 
dentally against the United States Government, 
on account of the policy pursued by Great Britain 



American Military Caste 99 

in seizing contraband found upon neutral ves- 
sels on the high seas; and against the United 
States Government for not placing an embargo 
on the shipment of munitions from this country 
to the allies. The propaganda was put forth with 
the utmost bitterness; one prominent poUtician 
had himself interviewed, and assailed the 
foreign and domestic policies of the ad- 
ministration, proclaiming what he would do if 
he were president, and among many other inno- 
vations of such policies he declared that he would 
place an embargo on all shipments of munitions 
of war from this country to the allies, until Great 
Britain omitted cotton from her contraband res- 
trictions. Many people endorsed such ideas; al- 
though not having suffered any loss by the seizure 
of cotton, they conceived that Great Britain's 
maritime policy would affect the price of their cot- 
ton, and demanded that she should abandon what 
she regarded as her rights under international 
law, so as to prevent a decline in price; and 
in one state a mass meeting of all people interest- 
ed in the cotton business was called for the pur- 
pose of coercing our government to proclaim the 
munitions embargo. It should be observed here 
to the honor and credit of the patriotic Americans 
of that state that this mass meeting was a dreary 



100 Anglophobia 

failure, and the embryonic pro-German organiza- 
tion collapsed. Not one not on inmate of an asy- 
lum for imbeciles can be found who will stultify 
himself by saying that this embargo scheme was 
not in the interest of the Central Powers. For 
more than forty years Germany had been pre- 
paring for this war, had accumulated an inex- 
haustible supply of all kinds of war material ; she 
needed nothing of the kind from other nations, 
except cotton for making explosives. In 191 5, 
if the Allies had been deprived of supplies of war 
munitions from America by an embargo, there is 
no doubt they would have gone down in defeat. 



CHAPTER IX. 

Embargo, Propagandists and American Esaus 

There can be no doubt that German intrigue was 
at the bottom of the propaganda to place an em- 
bargo on the shipment of munitions of war to the 
AlHes. The notes from Germany and Austria 
to the United States government concerning the 
depredations of the submarines on our shipping 
attempted to justify such depredations by allud- 
ing to the munitions of war that were being sup- 
plied to the Allies by American manufacturers, 
claiming that these supplies were prolonging the 
war, which meant that the Central Powers, being 
well stocked with war material, could soon over- 
come the Allies and establish German ascendency 
in the world if the United States would prohibit 
exportation of war munitions to the Allies. The 
pressure brought to bear on the United States by 
the propaganda was really to accomplish this de- 
feat of the Allies, and its real purpose and ob- 
ject was not even concealed by Germany. It is 
not surprising, however, that a certain class of 
American politicians should lead in this propa- 

lOI 



102 Anglophobia 

ganda ; they are men who place their own poHtical 
success above every other consideration; their 
love of country is measured by the personal bene- 
fit that they derive from their country ; they were 
either employed by the German intriguers, or, 
what is equally disgusting and contemptible, 
were making a bid for the German-American 
vote in their respective states or districts. 

But the saddest, the most incredible, the most 
incomprehensible feature of the attempt to force 
the United States into an unneutral attitude, and 
come to the aid of Germany by placing an em- 
bargo on munitions shipments, is, that Americans 
of Anglo-Saxon descent chiefly residing in the 
Southern states should have allowed themselves 
to be made tools of by the German intriguers and 
time-serving politicians, or should have allowed 
themselves to be worked up into such a state of 
intense exasperation against England by her 
supposed cotton contraband and against their own 
governm.ent and' its policies. These Americans 
were not illiterate or ignorant; they well knew 
that the success of the propaganda would result 
in practically disarming the Allies and in giving 
easy and speedy victory to Germany; they well 
knew that such a victory would soon lead to a 
conquest of this country and ultimate domination 



Embargo and Propagandists 103 

of the world by Germany. They were not ignor- 
ant of what German conquest would mean to this 
or any other country that offered resistance to her 
incursions: the very stones in the streets of the 
shattered cities and villages of Belgium, France, 
and Servia, are mute but eloquent heralds of the 
calamities that would result from such resistance. 
These Americans well knew that Prussianism 
and militarism with all the tyranny and barbarism 
that such a term implies would take the place of 
the civil and religious liberties of our democratic 
government, and that dirty and murderous Huns 
would be placed as masters over our fair women 
and brave men. Yet in the face of all these pos- 
sibilities and eminent probabilities, these Ameri- 
cans, who record an English name in their family 
Bible when a child is born to them ; these Ameri- 
cans whose fathers in 1865, at Appomatox Court 
House "buttoned their paroles in their faded grey 
jackets, casting one lingering look at the green 
hills of old Virginia where reposing in eternal 
sleep lay their fallen comrades, turned their faces 
to their devastated and war ruined South" ; 
these American propagandists for a munitions 
embargo, sons of those Confederate soldiers, who 
by patient labor and courage restored to pros- 
perity and happiness their war- wrecked, desolate 



104 Anglophobia 

Southland, were perfectly willing to have that 
same land laid desolate again, not in the cause of 
liberty and freedom, as their fathers believed, 
but in order that the price of cotton should re- 
main at ten cents the pound, and that England 
might be prostrated by the Huns. 

For more than four thousand years Esau has 
been held up to the scorn and contempt of man- 
kind as the supreme example of improvidence for 
selling his birthright to his brother, Jacob, for a 
mess of pottage, but he received a princely re- 
compense for his birthright compared to that 
which these Anglo-Americans were ready to ac- 
cept for their birthright. 

Esau's birthright was a vague, intangible 
something that would give him the right to be 
called the head of a tribe that was yet to be born 
into the world, and when he considered that his 
brother Jacob and descendants would be a part of 
that tribe, and knowing his brother Jacob as he 
did, he seemed to have regarded being the head 
of his family as of very doubtful honor, and of 
but little profit or pleasure, for he said: "What 
profit shall this birthright be to me?" Esau had 
returned from an unsuccessful hunt, his arrows 
all sped ; disappointed, tired, hungry and exhaust- 
ed, "he came from the field and was faint." 



Embargo and Propagandists io5 

The birthright of these American embargo 
propagandists that they proposed to barter was 
something that was definite, certain, and valuable ; 
it was the right of self government; freedom 
from tyranny ; equality before the law ; civil and 
religious liberty ; their right to be counted as part 
of one of the greatest nations that ever existed; 
their right of heritage to the honor which be- 
longed to the statesmen and patriots who founded 
our government and established our democratic 
institutions ; and their heritage to the honor that 
belonged to those whose greatness and wisdom 
have preserved, upheld and expanded our country 
and people. They did not even have the excuse 
of hunger, privation, or hard times, as did poor 
Esau, to justify their attempted barter of their 
divine blessings, for their country was never be- 
fore so prosperous nor its people better fed or 
clothed. However, they were willing to surren- 
der or barter all this birthright in order to re- 
ceive a few cents more per pound for one year's 
crop of cotton and to punish Great Britain for 
trying to deprive Germany of* cotton that she 
needed in making explosives. 

It would seem that even the slightest consider- 
ation for other interests would have moderated 
the zeal of the munition embargo propagandists ; 



io6 Anglophobia 

they were not ignorant of the countless millions 
of dollars pouring into this country to pay for 
these munitions of war, nor the fact that millions 
of dollars were invested by Americans in plants 
for their manufacture, nor that countless thou- 
sands of men and women in the United States 
were given employment and a chance to earn their 
bread in the manufacture of war material of all 
kinds ; they could not have been ignorant that an 
embargo would have ended the prosperity of this 
country produced by the immense volume of 
money sent by allied nations into the country in 
payment for the war munitions, nor to the fact 
that the embargo would have brought bankruptcy, 
loss of employment, distress and starvation to 
countless thousands of manufacturers and em- 
ployees. It will not do to attempt the pose of 
humanitarians by claiming that the embargo 
would have checked the effusion of blood and 
destruction of human life, because it would have 
only checked the flow of German and Turkish 
blood, not the blood of England, France, Russia, 
Italy, Belgium, and Servia; Germany with her 
immense stock of war material would have seen 
to that. 

It is enough to cause the patriot, philanthropist 
and humanitarian to stand appalled at the reck- 



Embargo and Propagandists lo? 

less disregard exhibited by intelligent American 
citizens for the cause of humanity, love of coun- 
try, for the welfare and happiness of their own 
countrymen and themselves, by seeking to en- 
force the embargo against war material, merely 
to satisfy a dislike for England, and greed for 
a little more money for their cotton. If the 
policies of our governmicnt could be controlled 
by men of such a nature and disposition, ready 
to sacrifice to greed and malice those things that 
Americans hold most dear, it might well be 
doubted that our people are really capable of self- 
government. Their captious and inconsiderate 
tendency is exhibited in their failing to ascertain, 
as they might have done, that up to the time 
of their most strenuous contention and for some- 
time afterwards, cotton had not, in fact, been de- 
clared contraband by Great Britain, but had been 
omitted originally from the list out of considera- 
tion for the American people. 



CHAPTER X. 
Civilization and Plans of Stephanus 
Johannes Paul Kruger 
There has not been since the war of 1812 in this 
country such an outburst of indignation and 
abuse of England as occurred at the outbreak of 
the Boer war; mass meetings were held at dif- 
ferent places in the United States at which 
speeches were made picturing the Boer nation as 
a small white republic of harmless, intelligent, 
God-fearing people, inspired with sturdy inde- 
pendence and love of liberty, who a genera- 
tion or two ago had been driven from Cape 
Colony by the oppression of Great Britain, and 
had "treked" northwards hundreds of miles and 
finally located in far away Transvaal ; and amidst 
privation and dangers and with hard labor had 
established comfortable homes, opened farms, 
stocked ranches, built up towns and cities, formed 
a government and enacted laws that suited their 
nation and necessities. That the discovery of 
gold and diamond mines in their country of un- 
told riches had brought fabulous wealth to the 
little nation, which was at peace with all the 
world. That such discoveries had excited the 
108 



Civilization and Plans of Kruger 109 

cupidity and avarice of Great Britain, who 
was waging the war to rob them of their wealth, 
as well as to subject them to tribute for all time 
to come. Such appeals and denunciations were 
left unanswered, and, as usual, when people are 
excited they scarcely ever stop to consider both 
sides of a question. The result was, as hereto- 
fore stated, that many thousand Americans made 
their way to the Transvaal "under the guise of 
medical expeditions and outfits" for service in the 
Boer army ; one complete corps went in this way 
from Chicago. The utterances, denunciations 
and appeals of the Boer sympathizers in public 
speeches and in newspaper and magazine articles, 
of the character as hereinbefore described, had 
much to do with creating and intensifying the dis- 
like of some Americans for England; many be- 
lieving today that Great Britain deliberately 
robbed and plundered the Boers of everything 
they possessed through avarice and covetousness. 
It is in line with the object and purpose of this 
treatise to correct whatever of error exists in the 
pro-Boer version of the causes and reasons lead- 
ing up to that war, addressing that sense of fair 
play and justice, which is the pride and boast of 
Americans. 

The Dutch progenitors of th^ Boers of Trans- 



^10 Anglophobia 

vaal first settled in Cape Colony about the year 
165 1. The territory of South Africa, as well as 
that of North America, at that age of the world 
was appropriated, colonized, fought over and 
ceded by the European nations without any refer- 
ence to the rights of the aborigines to any part 
of the territory. In America the most tractable 
of the Indian tribes were sometimes put on reser- 
vations, the other tribes were sometimes removed 
by booze, sometimes by bullets — often by both. 
In South Africa they controlled the black natives 
by bullets, booze and bondage. The process by 
which such territory was acquired was by "An- 
nexation," a species of contract to which there 
was only one contracting party and no valuable 
consideration, not even love and affection. The 
limits and boundaries of these annexations, 
usually, like a lawyer's objection to an indict- 
ment — were "vague, uncertain, and indefinite." 
They were supposed to extend from the point of 
discovery or actual possession in every direction 
until they reached the ocean or the boundaries of 
some previously annexed territory, claimed by 
some other European appropriator ; for instance, 
the French nation, by right of discovery, an- 
nexed the territory extending from the mouth of 
the St. Lawrence River to the Rocky Mountains 



Civilization and Plans of Kruger m 

in one direction, and northward to the EngHsh 
possession, and southward to the mouth of the 
Mississippi River. The English pre-empted the 
territory extending from Plymouth Rock north- 
ward and westward to French territory and 
southward to the Spanish possessions; so when 
the Republic of Holland about 1650 annexed 
Cape Colony, she claimed all the territory to an 
indefinite distance northward not in conflict with 
the territory claimed by Portugal, but including 
the Transvaal country. In 1806 Great Britain 
acquired all this territory with its indefined 
boundaries, and continued to rule over it ap- 
parently to the satisfaction of the majority of the 
Dutch inhabitants, until about 1835, when a large 
proportion of the Dutch or Boer population be- 
came exasperated at Great Britain's abolition of 
slavery, although receiving from Great Britain 
the full value of the slaves, and also on account of 
the abolition of some Dutch court and substituting 
an English court in its place. The Boer popula- 
tion then began their "treking," some going across 
the Orange River, but within British territory, 
where they founded what was afterwards known 
as the Orange Free State Republic. Others 
*'treked" north-eastward to Natal, a part of 
Cape Colony; but when in 1842 the British es- 



112 Anglophobia 

tablished their authority over that section, the 
Boers moved out northeastwardly across the 
Drackensburg Mountains into Transvaal, where 
they once more founded their commonwealth. 
They were followed later on by a large number 
of Boers from Cape Colony. On account of the 
bankruptcy of the Transvaal Republic, Great 
Britain was in 1877 compelled to annex it and 
administer its affairs for the benefit of its credit- 
ors. In December, 1881, the Boers rebelled, and 
the British being caught without proper support 
from their government, were defeated in Jan- 
uary, 1882, and cut to pieces; this so affected 
Prime Minister Gladstone that he made peace and 
acknowledged the independence of the Boer Re- 
public; however retaining the power of Great 
Britain to veto all foreign treaties that might be 
entered into by the Boer Republic. 

The English people were very much dissatis- 
fied with the manner in which the Prime Minis- 
ter had managed the affairs of South Africa, 
claiming that the speedy defeat of the English, 
and passive surrender of English territory to 
rebellious subjects, would advertise the English 
people to the world as a decadent nation, and 
that the empire was declining and would soon 
fall to pieces; an impression well calculated to 



Civilization and Plans of Kruger 113 

destroy the respect which all the other nations of 
the world had shown to her; a prediction that 
was fully verified by expressions 'in regard to the 
nation, used by her enemies during the Boer war 
and during the first two years of the present Eu- 
ropean war. It was thought and hoped that now, 
the Boers having achieved permanent independ- 
ence, and being imbued with intense religious fer- 
vor, they would occupy among the nations of the 
earth a high plane of national integrity and 
righteousness. But it seems that the insidious 
poison of greed and ambition soon entered the 
souls of their President, Stephanus Johannes 
Paul Kruger, and many of their leaders and 
people. This president was a man of some abil- 
ity, possessing force, statecraft and shrewdness — 
born in Cape Colony, he had as a boy joined in 
the great trek to Transvaal and was steeped and 
soaked and saturated with hatred for Great Brit- 
ain and her people. He had some of the Teu- 
tonic ideas of the deified nature and character of 
the State, and believed, like the Kaiser, that it 
was perfectly right and proper to rob, kill or 
steal for the benefit of the State. 

Soon after becoming president he conceived 
the idea of expelling the English authority from 
all of Cape Colony and annexing it to the South 



114 Anglophobia 

African Republic, and with that purpose in view- 
began intriguing with the Boer population whose 
ancestors remained in Cape Colony at the time of 
the great trek, comprising more than one half of 
the white population. He also began negotia- 
tions with the Orange Free State Republic to 
form an alliance with the Boer Republic to expel 
the English government, not only from Cape 
Colony, but also from the vast territory of Great 
Britain lying west and north of the two Repub- 
lics, in which were situated the diamond fields of 
South Africa — all of which territory he designed 
to consolidate with the two republics and create 
a Grand Boer Republic that would be larger in 
extent than the Republic of Mexico. The 
scheme was comprehensive and daring, and was 
the first fruit of Gladstone's pacific and sub- 
missive policy in yielding to the Boer demands 
in 1881-82; and, considering the easy defeat of 
the British in that war, the scheme was from the 
limited point of view of President Kruger ex- 
ceedingly plausible and easy of accomplishment. 
Being very illiterate, he had never read the his- 
tory of the Anglo-Saxon race or learned, as he 
did later on, of their courage and determination 
when once aroused. During the fifteen or more 
years of his administration as president of the 



Civilization and Plans of Kruger ii5 

republic his influence over the Volksraad, the 
legislative branch of his government, caused the 
enactment of many laws that were oppressive and 
extortionate against the English people and other 
foreign property holders in Transvaal, which 
laws will be discussed in the next chapter. 



CHAPTER XL 

Original ''Scrap of Paper" Treaty — Dogs 
OF War Let Loose 

Previous to the time of the gold discovery, the 
Boers of the Transvaal were engaged almost ex- 
clusively in agriculture and stockraising. They 
were industrious and frugal, and the finest rifle 
shots in the world, made so by hunting wild 
game and fighting the savage black tribes that 
infested and surrounded their country. They 
were intensely religious; it was a custom among 
them in an emergency to open at random the 
Bible that each carried with him, and consult 
the first passage his eye lighted upon, for some 
hint or expression to guide him in the emergency ; 
a great many of their arguments on scientific and 
geographic subjects were supported or refuted 
by reference to the Holy Scriptures. 

In the year 1896 a hot controversy was carried 
on in the Transvaal in regard to the shape of the 
earth, one faction asserting that it was round, 
the other denying the rotundity of our planet, 
maintaining that it was flat; many debates and 
116 



"Scrap of Paper" Treaty n? 

written arguments pro and con were uttered and 
printed. The President, Stephanus Johannes 
Paul Kruger, espoused the flat theory and print- 
ed a thesis on the subject, proving by the scrip- 
tural reference to the "Ends of the earth" that 
the world was flat; pointing out with logic per- 
fectly satisfactory to his side that a globe or any 
round object had nothing that could be called an 
end. 

The Boer population of the Transvaal, on ac- 
count of their avocations and isolation were not 
familiar with scientific pursuits, especially that of 
mining or mine engineering, and the gold mines 
of the country soon became owned by the for- 
eigners, designated **out-landers." Every en- 
couragement was given to foreigners to invest in 
and develop these mines; the Boer government 
being compensated by a tax on the gross receipts 
of the mine owners. Tlie revenue thus derived 
was vastly more than sufficient to defray govern- 
ment expenses. A large proportion of the ex- 
cess was used by the president in the purchase 
abroad of war munitions of every kind and of 
the latest discovery and improvement. These were 
stored in various places in the republic ; bands of 
minute men were organized and trained for quick 
mobilization and field service. Although these 



ii8 Anglophobia 

military preparations were going on for years, 
and although it was publicly known that they 
were made in contemplation of a war with Great 
Britain, the British government seemed to have 
paid no attention to them, at least not until Glad- 
stone's service as Prime Minister ended in 1894. 
The additional expenses of paying and clothing 
and provisioning this army required more 
revenue ; this was provided for by several meas- 
ures of the government that were very oppressive 
and unjust to the outlander mine owners. One of 
these measures was the government monoply of 
dynamite ; the price fixed on this commodity was 
so extortionate that many of the smaller mine 
owners were compelled to suspend work in them. 
This inaction gave the government the right to 
take charge of these properties and operate them 
for the benefit of the state. Another oppressive 
measure against the outlanders and mine owners 
was a high import duty on all breadstuflfs import- 
ed into the Transvaal. The high prices for 
breadstuffs caused by the tariff was especially 
beneficial to the Boer farmers, and as the farm- 
ers of that country produce only about one-sixth 
of that commodity needed for the consumption in 
the country, the tariff on the remaining five-sixths 
that had to be imported, not only produced a 



"Scrap of Paper" Treaty 119 

satisfactory revenue, but caused other outlanders 
to abandon their mines, because they could not 
afford to pay the increased wages to the miners 
that became necessary to meet the increased cost 
of Uving. 

These abandoned mines were all taken over 
by the Transvaal government. No outlander 
was permitted to vote or have any voice in the 
government unless he became a naturalized citi- 
zen and renounced forever all allegiance to his 
native country; and if the authorities believed 
that such renunciation was merely a temporary 
expedient to enable him to have a voice in the 
government, his application for citizenship would 
be rejected. The city of Johannesberg, a mining 
town, was founded in 1886, and within ten years 
it had grown to be a city of more than 102,000 in- 
habitants. More than three-fourths of the white 
population of this city were outlanders who 
owned more than five-sixths of the taxable wealth 
of the city; but notwithstanding this, they had no 
vote or voice in the selection of officers or the 
regulation of municipal affairs, and were con- 
stantly subjected to petty annoyances, exactions 
and official peculation without remedy or redress 
in the courts or elsewhere. 

A petition was sent to Queen Victoria in the 



120 Anglophobia 

summer of 1899 detailing the grievances of the 
outlanders and signed by 21,000 British subjects 
in the Transvaal ; but it failed to bring any relief. 
To check the growing strength of the outlanders 
an anti-emigration law was passed by the Volks- 
raad, which was in direct violation of the ex- 
isting treaty with Great Britain. President Kru- 
ger, in the summer of 1897, expressly repudiated 
that part of the treaty of 1881 which gave Great 
Britain the suzerainty over the Transvaal Re- 
public, which comprised the right to veto any 
treaty that the Republic might make with any 
power; at the same time insisting on Great Brit- 
ain being bound by that part of the treaty secur- 
ing to the Transvaal Republic its independence. 
This was the original example of regarding a 
treaty, or part of a treaty, as a "scrap of paper" 
when it stood in the way of a nation's ambition 
or wishes. 

About the last of December, 1895, the outland- 
ers of Johannesberg formed a political organiza- 
tion and published a "Bill of Rights" — rights 
which they claimed to be entitled to as foreign 
residents of a civilized country. Meantime, sev- 
eral prominent outlanders sent to the English peo- 
ple at Mafeking, across the border, an appeal for 
help, which together with the publication of the 



"Scrap of Paper'' Treaty 121 

Bill of Rights led the English people at Mafeking 
to think the outlanders at Johannesberg were 
about to revolt against the oppression of the 
Transvaal government, whereupon about 700 
English volunteers, headed by Jameson, started a 
raid to Johannesberg, a distance of about 100 
miles. The expected uprising of Johannesberg 
failed to materialize. The preparedness of the 
Transvaal Republic for war was exhibited when 
more than 2,000 well armed Boer troops were as- 
sembled in less than forty-eight hours from the 
time the authorities received news of the raid. 
These met the English before they reached 
Johannesberg and surrounded and captured them. 
President Kruger was in favor of' shooting the 
English as filibusters. Secretary Chamberlain 
telegraphed to Kruger disavowing the raid and 
asking for kind treatment of the raiders. The 
president finally yielded to conservative counsel of 
prominent citizens and officials who dreaded the 
consequences that might follow upon the anger of 
the English, aroused by the execution of the raid- 
ers ; so Jameson was conducted across the frontier 
and sailed for England where he and others were 
tried and convicted and sentenced to imprison- 
ment for terms ranging from six to fifteen months 
for raiding the republic. 



122 Anglophobia 

The assurance and arrogance of the President 
in the successful consummation of his ambitious 
schemes was extravagantly increased by receiving 
a telegram of congratulations from the German 
Emperor on the outcome of the Jameson raid. 

His intrigues with the Boers of Cape Colony 
were so successful that many of them openly de- 
clared their intention to join the forces of Kruger 
when he invaded Cape Colony. The Africanders 
in the Cape of Good Hope Assembly boldly de- 
clared their friendship for the Transvaal Boers, 
and introduced measures tending to commit Cape 
Colony to the policies of Kruger. ' 

At last the British government aroused from 
its apathy and realized the nature and extent of 
the ambition of the rulers of the Transvaal Re- 
public. After the President, Styn, let it be 
known that the Orange Free State Republic 
would side with the Transvaal in case of war 
with England, Great Britain prevailed on the 
Portugese government to prohibit further ship- 
ment of war munitions through Portuguese ter- 
ritory to the Transvaal, and moved 30,000 re- 
serves from England to the northeast frontier of 
Cape Colony to resist the threatened invasion of 
British possessions. 

On the loth of October, 1899, the Transvaal 



''Scrap of Paper'' Treaty 123 

government demanded the withdrawal of all Brit- 
ish troops from the frontier, as well as the return 
to England of all reinforcements to the British 
army that had been brought to Cape Colony since 
June of that year, fixing the next day as the time 
in which Great Britain should signify her inten- 
tion to comply with the demand. No response 
being made, Orange Free State declared war 
against England, and the Boer forces immediately 
assumed the offensive. So the conflict began 
that would forever decide the fate of South 
Africa and the Boer Republics. 



CHAPTER XII. 

Comparative Manhood — Kruger and a Mier 
Prisoner 

It would be just as absurd and nonsensical to 
allege that President Kruger did not plan and 
prepare years in advance for the war, and did not 
plan in advance for the campaign that he actual- 
ly made, and that England forced the war on the 
Boer Republics, as it would be to assert that 
Germany had made no preparation for the pres- 
ent war, or that she had made no attack on 
France, or that she had no previous intention of 
invading Belgium. The evidence of prepared- 
ness, premeditation and campaign planning is as 
strong, or stronger, in the case of the Boers than 
it is in the case of the Germans. Two days af- 
ter war was declared the Boers had mobilized a 
force on the west border and laid siege to Mafe- 
king, and on the same day they laid siege to Kim- 
beiiy, 250 miles south of Mafeking, and five days 
later they attacked and defeated the British 
forces at Dundee, 400 miles east of Kimberly. 
On the next day after the declaration of war a 



124 



Mier Prisoner 125 

strong force of Boers captured a British ar- 
moured train 50 miles south of Mafeking. The 
presence of the Boer troops in such numbers at 
places so widely separated, and their offensive ac- 
tion, is quite sufficient to prove that the Transvaal 
Republic was the aggressor and had been so from 
the beginning. Never in all history had Great 
Britain manifested such a desire for peace with an 
aggressive people; she had never before shown 
such patience and forbearance and willingness, in 
order to keep the peace, to yield to arrogant and 
presumptuous demands; never before had she 
failed to demand reparation for injuries done to 
her subjects, in person and in property rights. 
The sudden and successful attacks on the Brit- 
ish forces, in which thousands of British soldiers 
were laid low by the markmanship of Boer rifle- 
men, caused a shout of exultation among the 
enemies of England throughout the world. In 
the United States it took the form of extravagant 
praise and fulsome eulogy for President Kruger 
that was almost idolatrous. He was compared 
to George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Simon 
Bolivar and other great leaders of peoples strug- 
gling for freedom and liberty. His picture was 
printed in magazines and newspapers, posted at 
public places, and placed on a special brand of 



126 Anglophobia 

cigars. The smallest details of his life, current 
and past, were dug up and given to the public, 
including the noted feat of wrenching an offend- 
ing tooth from his jaw with a pair of bullet 
moulds. Verses were written about him and in- 
scribed to him; he was affectionately referred to 
as "Oom Paul," which in the Dutch vernacular is 
"Uncle Paul," all of which was enough to turn 
his head if it had not already been addled with 
success and praise. 

After about eighteen months of strife, carnage 
and destruction of property in the Boer Republics 
"Oom Paul" saw the handwriting on the wall, and 
his retirement from public life and gaze can best 
be described by introducing at this point, as a 
standard comparison, an episode in the life of 
one of the grand men of Texas, and for this pur- 
pose I beg of the readers the privilege of just one 
digression. 

About the year 1840 a young English lawyer 
located at Matagorda, Texas. His name was 
James C. Wilson; soon afterwards he joined the 
expedition under General Alexander Somerville 
sent by President Houston to the Rio Grande, 
and was one of the three hundred men captured 
at Mier in old Mexico, and so became one of the 
historic "Mier prisoners" ; and was one of those 



Mier Prisoner 127 

prisoners who overpowered their Mexican guard 
and attempted to escape, but were recaptured. 
To punish the attempt Santa Anna ordered one- 
tenth of the one hundred and seventy-six to be 
shot. The mode of selecting the victims was by 
lot, one hundred and fifty-nine white beans and 
seventeen black beans were placed in an earthen 
jar, and the prisoners were each required to draw 
one bean, those drawing the black beans were the 
victims to be shot. Before the drawing the Brit- 
ish consul at the place promised James C. Wilson 
indemnity if he would claim British protection; 
even some of his comrades, fellow prisoners, ad- 
vised him to do so, and so escape the peril of 
drawing; but what did that magnificent young 
Englishman say and what did he do? He said: 
"I have cast my lot with these Texas boys, we 
have fought together and suffered together; we 
have stood by each other in privation, in danger, 
and in face of death ; I will not desert them now ; 
if I should draw a black bean I will save the life 
of one of my comrades and I will take his place 
in the death line." 

He took his turn and draw a white bean and 
lived. The noblest and best of our race feel it a 
privilege to stand with uncovered heads as a 
tribute tp such chivalrous heroism as was then 



128 Anglophobia 

displayed by James C. Wilson. I will digress 
further by saying that after his return to Texas 
he resumed the practice of his profession and 
later entered poUtics. His abiUty as a lawyer 
and statesman was soon recognized throughout 
the state. He was put forward by his friends as 
a candidate for the United States Senate, and he 
seemed to be without opposition; but before the 
Legislature met, yielding to that strong sense of 
duty which had always been the propelling force 
of his life, he suddenly retired from politics, re- 
nounced his candidacy, and entered the ministry 
as an itinerant Methodist preacher. It was my 
good fortujie when a mere child to see him at my 
father's house, and it was one of the fondest re- 
collections of my life, that the brave hand that 
drew forth that white bean in that awful lottery 
of life and death once rested on my youthful head 
as in a kindly benediction. 

When in the summer of 1900 the Boer armies 
by the pressure of the British forces under Lord 
Roberts were broken up into guerilla bands, Pres- 
ident Stephannus Johannes Paul Kruger had a 
most excellent chance to display those great 
qualities of mind and heart which had been attri- 
buted to him by his Anglophobist admirers in 
America and elsewhere. He realized that it was 



Mier Prisoner 129 

only a question of time until all resistance of the 
Boers would be overcome and that his people 
would lie helpless at the feet of the conqueror. 
He knew the devastation and ruin that his war 
had brought to his country, and the famine and 
distress then existing among the widows and chil- 
dren of the deluded men that had fallen through 
his ambition for lust and power. Did he dis- 
tribute the million or two dollars of public money 
under his control to these starving women and 
children or to those soldiers who were still fight- 
ing for him? Did he remain in the Transvaal and 
offer to share the disasters and punishment that 
an outraged conquering nation might choose to 
inflict upon his deluded countrymen? Did he 
offer to share in the misfortune, privation and 
distress that he alone had brought upon his people, 
or propose to aid in restoring his wasted and war- 
harried Transvaal? History has answered these 
questions; "Oom Paul" transmitted to European 
banks all of the remaining funds of the republic 
and had them deposited in his own name; 
and then in disguise, President Stephannus 
Johannes Paul Kruger crossed the eastern front- 
ier and struck a turkey trot for Delgoa Bay, 
thence to Europe, where he spent the remainder 
of his days, like some ex-presidents of South 



130 Anglophobia 

American republics, living comfortably on the 
public money that he had sent in advance, while 
the Boer farmer soldier, who had an equal right 
to it, struggled for a living with his starving wife 
and children in the wasted land, a land de- 
pleted of food, of live stock, of farm implements, 
by the war that he, Paul Kruger, had instigated. 



CHAPTER XIII. 

Parallel Between the United States and 

Great Britain in the Treatment of 

Mormons, Filipinos and Boers 

It is a singular perversity in a man whose mind 
is clouded with prejudice, that he will bitterly 
condemn the acts of one whom he dislikes, but 
will pass over or even approve the same thing in 
another. Ordinarily, it is an unprofitable con- 
sumption of time to combat the prejudice of such 
a man by showing an inconsistency of this kind; 
however, for the benefit of the pro-Boer Ameri- 
cans who desire to be fair towards Great Britain, 
I will draw some comparisons between Great 
Britain's relation to, and treatment of, the Boers, 
and the treatment of the Mormons, and also the 
Filipinos, by the United States; and in making 
these comparisons, I desire to emphasize that the 
measures taken by our government in the case of 
the Mormons, as well as the Filipinos, were in 
every respect right and proper. There are sev- 
eral interesting points of resemblance between the 
political history and movements of the Boers and 
131 



132 Anglophobia 

those of the Mormons. The Boers "treked" from 
Cape Colony to Natal, thence on to the Trans- 
vaal, about five hundred miles in all. The Mor- 
mons "treked" from Navoo in Missouri to Coun- 
cil Bluff, Iowa, thence on to the Great Salt Lake, 
in all about fifteen hundred miles. The Boer 
government robbed the citizens of Great Britain 
in Transvaal by taxation, tariff and monopoly. 
The Mormons robbed citizens of the United 
States, passing through Utah, by bands of rob- 
bers under the command of "Destroying Angels" 
— so called. The Boers claimed that Holland 
could not cede to England her possessions in 
South Africa, and deprive the Dutch colonists 
and descendants of the right to establish an in- 
dependent government at any point in such pos- 
session. The Mormons claimed that Mexico 
could not cede to the United States territory in- 
cluding Utah and so deprive them of the right 
to have an independent government of their own. 
Both countries, Transvaal and Utah, increased in 
wealth and population until they each became 
defiant towards the respective governments. In 
December, 1880, the Boers attacked the British 
at Heidelburg, Transvaal, killing 112 British sol- 
diers, with Boer losses of one killed and five 
wounded. After several small, but sweeping. 



Mormons, Filipinos and Boers i33 

victories, won by reason of superior marksman- 
ship, in February following the Boers, four hun- 
dred in number, stormed Majuba Hill, defended 
by six hundred British troops, and defeated them, 
killing eighty- four men and capturing one hun- 
dred and twenty-two prisoners, and so gained 
their independence from the Gladstone govern- 
ment. 

The Mormons in 1857, having increased to 40,- 
000 in population, and having with perfect im- 
punity at Mountain Meadow robbed an immi- 
grant train on its way to California, and massa- 
cred one hundred and twenty immigrants, they 
proceeded to drive the federal judge from the 
bench in Salt Lake City, and destroy the records 
of the Federal Court, because of an attempt to 
enforce the United States jurisdiction over the 
territory, and otherwise asserted their independ- 
ence of the United States. General Albert Sid- 
ney Johnson, with a force of 2,500 men, was dis- 
patched to Utah, who soon suppressed the rebel- 
lion. The Filipinos also claimed the right to an 
independent government, denying that they could 
be deprived of that right through the cession by 
Spain of the Philippine Islands to the United 
States. 

There is one feature common to all these par- 



134 Anglophobia 

ticular aggregations of peoples. They were each 
led and dominated by one individual: the Mor- 
mons by Brigham Young; the Filipinos by 
Aguinaldo, and the Boers by President Kruger; 
each of them possessed great force of character 
and executive ability, but each of them was 
singularly uninformed of existing conditions in 
the world, and of the force and power of the two 
mighty nations that they defied ; an ignorance like 
that displayed by a North American Indian-chief 
and his tribe starting on the war path, thinking 
to overcome the United States. 

There is another feature common to all these 
people; they were each conquered by the nation 
they defied, and are each in far better condition 
today than as if they had never been conquered ; 
and they have surrendered no right of real value 
to them. The subjugation of the Filipinos has 
preserved peace among them, prevented insurrec- 
tions and internal strife. They have been protect- 
ed from predatory nations of Europe and Asia on 
the hunt for territory to colonize or for trade ex- 
pansion; they have been trained in the arts of 
civilization and self-government, and are now in a 
fair way to become a freer, prosperous and happy 
people. Utah has achieved statehood with free- 
dom and liberty far in excess of that she had un- 



Mormons, Filipinos and Boers i35 

der the hierarchy of Brigham Young and his 
high priests ; and all by merely waiving the right 
of her male citizens to have more than one wife 
at a time. 

This chapter details many apparently meaning- 
less facts, comparisons and analogies, but they 
are recited for the purpose of driving home to 
the mind of the pro-Boer American this proposi- 
tion: if it was right morally and politically for 
the United States to subjugate and annex the ter- 
ritory of the Filipinos and Mormons, it was right 
for Great Britain to subjugate the Transvaal and 
Orange republics. With this difference in favor 
of Great Britain: the action of the United 
States was primarily for conquest, that of Eng- 
land was in defense of her territory and of the 
rights of tens of thousands of her people w^ho 
had settled in Cape Colony, in Grinuland and in 
the British East, Central and South African prov- 
inces of Nyassaland and Bechuanaland from sub- 
jugation and government by people whose rulers 
had always exhibited a hatred to the English and 
who had shown a disposition to oppress and ex- 
tort from the "stranger that was within her gates." 
It was to protect her wealthy and cultured Eng- 
lish citizens of Cape Town, Kimberly, and Mafe- 
king from being ruled and dominated by a people 



13^ Anglophobia 

whose ruler still contended that the world is flat. 
While dissatisfied with the weakness of the Glad- 
stone administration in tamely surrendering her 
territory, Great Britain for more than fifteen 
years in good faith adhered to the treaty conced- 
ing the independence of the Transvaal Republic, 
and treated that nation with all the respect and 
consideration due the sovereignty of an independ- 
ent government; notwithstanding the repeated 
violation of a part of the treaty by the Boer 
president, the part which gave Great Britain her 
suzerainty. And there is no doubt that the 
Transvaal Republic would be in existence today 
if its government had been directed by wise, con- 
servative and enlightened statesmanship. It had 
been clearly demonstrated that the two peoples, 
English and Boers, could not live at peace in ad- 
joining territory under separate and independent 
governments. Conditions demanded that both 
races should be under the same ruler ; and so af- 
ter the war started it soon became a life and 
death struggle for governmental sovereignty. On 
the part of the Boers it was a war of conquest as 
well as for more complete independence by the 
abrogation of British suzerainty; on the part of 
Great Britain it was to maintain her sovereignty 
in her South African possessions and to protect 



Mormons, Filipinos and Boers i37 

the lives, liberty and property of her English 
subjects. 

Great Britain was victorious. Most of the 
Boer leaders and many of the citizens abandoned 
the country. Those that remained were sunken 
in abject poverty and many rendered homeless by 
the devastations of the war. It was then that the 
English government exhibited that magnanimity 
that was never in all history of warfare before 
shown by a conquering nation to its vanquished 
foe, and is enough to make every man of Anglo- 
Saxon blood proud of his race. Great Britain 
supplied those poor Boers with food, with cloth- 
ing, with work stock, with domestic animals, with 
farm implements, with building material to re- 
build their homes ; free schools were provided for 
their children. They were treated like human 
beings, they were soon given local self govern- 
ment with far more wholesome liberty than they 
had ever possessed under the oligarchy of Kru- 
ger and his associates. This kind of treatment 
was not without effect on the Boer population ; it 
seemed to open their eyes to the manner in which 
they had been deceived and exploited by their 
rulers; they have shown their loyalty and grati- 
tude to the English government during the pres- 
ent war by driving the Germans out of their col- 



13B Anglophobia 

onies in East and West Africa, besides furnishing 
many gallant soldiers for the trenches in France. 
I invite the Anglophobist who possesses magna- 
nimity, nobility of character and chivalry, and can 
appreciate these qualities in others, to compare 
this English treatment with the treatment given to 
the people of France, Belgium and Siberia by the 
German government. 

THE END 



NOTE 



The authorities and in part the sources of in- 
formation used in this treatise are as follows : 

Green's History of England, Vol. 3 and 4; His- 
tory of the Nineteenth Century, by Dr. Edwin 
Emerson; Messages and Papers of The Presid- 
ents (Administrations of Adams, Jefferson and 
Madison) ; Bissett's History of The Reign of 
George HI (Edition 1828), Vols, i to 5 — History 
of The American People, by Woodrow Wilson; 
History of France, Vol. 7, by M. Guizot ; History 
of Revolutions in Europe, by C. W. Koch (Edi- 
tion of 1832) ; Pennybacker's New History of 
Texas. ^ | ^ ^Q 



C 15 80 



.w 





















o V 



•^-0^ 



•>*\...V*-'>\.. V--',.^ 







% 



t >' 



'oV 







/% 







V * 






<>•■■-'>■■ 







